Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Octopus, post: 180248, member: 4"] Generally they're always described as being exclusively human mixed with whatever else, at least in [I]D&D. [/I]If I remember correctly it wasn't until 4th Ed that an official blurp in the book said essentially "you could just say you're a elf/orc or dwarf/elf or whatever"; it didn't change any rules or anything and was just entirely for flavour. I think it was 4th Ed, I could be wrong. [I]Pathfinder [/I]played more with this with racial feats on the half races letting you take elements of other races instead of being default human. That was the best example I could think of to post what you're dealing with in [I]AD&D[/I]. It's a nightmare. He calls it dicing multiple times throughout the book, and every time it makes me giggle. It makes it sounds simultaneously more formal while more childish, somehow. Your guess is as good as mine. It doesn't make sense as like a 'called shot' kind of thing since it involves random chance to see if you even aim at their head, and it's made even more confusing since there's no listed effect from it? I mean you can assume it would do more damage or something, but that's extrapolating from the rules. I'm doing these reviews RAW, baby (rules as written). I know right? It's inexcusable to me to have terrible book organization. It's the easiest part of making a TTRPG; put things where they're supposed to go. Sometimes, mainly with newer players who aren't used to how things work and just want to play the game, which is understandable. I've played with the same group for like 12 years now, so in our case it's not so bad given our experience and all that. Usually if we need up having to look a rule up it turns into an impromptu roundtable game design discussion about it which really helps understand a system. My recommendation for new players for this is just to make a ruling on the spot for the session then come back to it once the games over just to keep the game flow going. Worry about the specifics later when people aren't getting impatient. That reminds me that I never really touched on that in my either my TTRPG history in general article or my 1st Ed one. There could be enough history there to make one dedicated to it maybe. I remember my dad telling me that back when he was playing [I]Basic [/I]that some of his classmates were buying into the whole '[I]D&D [/I]is satanic and teaches you how to summon demons!' thing, so it did have an effect outside of mass media. Most of it came from [I]AD&D[/I]s Fiend Folio book which literally had stats for Beelzebub and Lucifer, combined with the usual moral posturing of course. That's more or less the retro TTRPG design bible. It's like I mentioned in the review, people were still trying to figure this stuff out and many ended up leaving it to the player's to fill in the blanks rule wise. Some were better than others of course, but the 'retro TTRPG feel' is dealing with some vagaries and needing to use your imagination sometimes. Do it! If you're looking for something retro like this, I'd recommend Moldvay Basic or maybe 2nd Ed AD&D; it's been a hot minute since I played it, but I remember it being way more concise than 1st Ed. If you're looking just for DnD TTRPG vibe in general, I'd say 3.5 is the best edition to look into as it's easily the most identifiable and influential in modern pop culture. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Online statistics

Members online: 191

Guests online: 378

Total visitors: 569

Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads: 10,516

Messages: 259,991

Members: 838,219

Latest member: Eliebelly

Reply to thread

Online statistics

Forum statistics

Advertisers