Transformers Producer Enters Into Deal With Gygax Estate To "Oversee

K

File: goldleader-620x349.jpg (45KB, 620x349px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 620x349px

>>48510107
Grognard Leader, reporting in.

This is a thing that happened. That thing does or does not provoke unspecified emotion within me. It may or may not make me feel something that I feel a need to express.

>>48510107

WTF's a Gygax Catalog?

>>48511316

I would hazard they mean his body of work.

I don't know what to talk about, but I will get mad whenever you want me to.

Honestly, as much as I love Gary, he was a fairly subpar designer and an even worse writer. Where he excelled was being innovative and recognizing the creative potential of the idea and brand he co-founded. Hence why all of his adventures are much, much better than the actual rules who wrote. Reading through OD&D and 1e, I never got the idea that he was some master of the craft.

>>48511327

What body of work that isn't owned by some company already?

D&D? Owned by WotC.

What else is there that's interesting?

>>48511428
I bet you have a poster of Ed Greenwood above your bed.

>>48511447
His forum posts badly explaining alignment and showing what a bitter old man he became in the 90s and 00s?

>>48511473

,,, I'd rather spend time with my grandfather and father for my dose of old man.

Scores me family points.

>>48511461
Not at all, I'm just saying that I doubt his 'body of work' is composed of anything substantial. D&D is an amazing creation, no one here is doubting that, but the rules themselves are often erratically designed and the writing is simply not that great (though the latter, again, tends to be much better in an actual adventure instead of a rulebook).

>>48511507

It's also not part of the Gygax Catalog, due to Gygax giving the ownership to TSR, TSR kicking him out, and TSR exploding and WotC picking up the rights.

>>48511522
I know. His actually prolific work is not publishable by this new deal, so what remains is (unless he got better, which I doubt) erratically designed, poorly written rules, and (hopefully!) some decent adventures.

>>48511507
And yet somehow everything Gygax has ever written seems to magically solve at least half the shitposts on /tg/ if anyone had bothered to read him in the first place.

>>48511599
Samefag here. Yes. I said everything and I'm sticking to it. Including grocery lists. Don't pretend you're all shocked about it either.

>>48511599
Not once have I ever seen an example of this. In any case, it's foolish to put his work on some pedestal at this point just because he co-wrote D&D. I'd be more interested in his work at a historical level.

>>48511542

.... What system would the adventures use?

>>48511658
His work "at a historical level" makes him worthy of the pedestal.

What, you didn't contribute to the memorial? Typical entitlement mentality.

>>48511658
Example: Why can't I play as a monster?

Gygax addressed that.

Example: Fudging dice.

Gygax addressed that.

>>48511686
No clue what Gygax worked on after he was ejected from TSR.

>>48511689
No post-D&D work, hell any post 1e work period, of Gygax's is worthy of a pedestal of any sort.

>>48511720
Lots of people have addressed those things. Some of the best rulebooks I have read have said 'fuck it, play as a monster if you want'. That Gygax was the first to address it doesn't make his addressment the best or an absolute.

It is a fact that Gygax was very much so a 'control freak' regarding his rules and wanted objectivity for adventure consistency and tournament play.

>>48511722
Legendary Adventures, Cyborg Commando, a bunch of unofficial AD&D shit, and Dangerous Journeys.

>>48511741

Hell, 4e released some playable NPC's that half use the PC rules and half use the monster rules to make a playable monsters, including succubi, friendly owlbears and so on.

They explicitly don't have advancement, but that's just them inheriting 4e's monster rules.

>>48511741
>Lots of people have addressed those things.
Yes, and creatively so out of their ass. Gygax did it first; authoritatively.

>>48511772

All I remember about those is people saying Cyborg Commando wasn't very good.

>>48511741
>It is a fact that Gygax was very much so a 'control freak'

It's called leadership. Something you kids wouldn't recognize.

>>48511802

If you do it first, but do it badly, it doesn't fucking matter that people copied you and made it better.

All art is creative copying.

>>48511789
>They explicitly don't have advancement

If no advancement, then why play? Oh yeah, I forgot, because snowflakes need to be more special than all the other players.

>>48511824
>If you do it first, but do it badly,

Purely subjective assessment noted.

File: gary gygax - egalitarianism_1.png (45KB, 1840x373px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 1840x373px

>>48511473

Shut up, cuck.

>>48511473
>badly explaining alignment

To be fair, you being unable to understand doesn't mean his explanations were bad.

The 9 Gygaxian alignments were much more general, and had to be since an alignment was something you're not going to change often. He erred on the side of letting players interpret alignments more freely. How bitterly misanthropic do you have to be to not like that?

>>48511837
They're for companion characters.

>>48511837

Because someone wants to play for a session and then go?

Or you want to introduce a player to the combat without hacking up a new PC?

As a person who doesn't really like the creation process of games, but the actual game itself, knowing that the basic combat for the game is fun is important.

>>48511741
>tournament play.
> D&D

How was this supposed to work ?

>>48511905
>>48511919

>"On occasion one player or another will evidence a strong desire to operate as a monster, >conceiving a playable character as a strong demon, a devil, a dragon, or one of the most powerful >sort of undead creatures. This is done principally because the player sees the desired monster >character as superior to his or her peers and likely to provide a dominant role for him or her in the >campaign. A moment of reflection will bring them to the unalterable conclusion that the game is >heavily weighted towards mankind."

IOW, you're a goddamn munchkin if you allow monsterfags, furfags, etc.

>"Those works which do not feature mankind in a central role are uncommon. Those which do not >deal with men at all are scarce indeed. To attempt to utilize any such bases as the central, let >alone sole, theme for a campaign milieu is destined to be shallow, incomplete, and totally >unsatisfying for all parties concerned unless the creator is a Renaissance Man and all-around >universal genius with a decade or two to prepare the game and milieu."

IOW, this type of player is in the middle of such an existential crisis as to not even identify as a human being anymore. Sounds like many of the people I run into at cons nowadays.

>"The less intelligent players who demand to play monster characters regardless of obvious >consequences will soon remove themselves from play in any event, for their own ineptness will >serve to have players or monsters or traps finish them off."

>Gary Gygax, 1979

Since that's all anyone plays them for, is pure edge value. Too busy trying to impress everyone at the table to actually create a character.

>>48512015
You have a bunch of groups doing a module at the same time. You score points for certain things. Highest points wins. Look up the C-series modules for more details, they're all tourney ones.

>>48512015
Stuff like Tomb of Horrors, which can be seen as either difficult or cheap on death, were originally made for tournaments where teams of players would sit down with a DM and run through a module. Those who would get the farthest and reach parameters like 'least dead characters' would be the winners.

>>48512046
Compare that with OD&D, five years earlier.
>sure you can play a monster, but it has to start off weak and grow stronger

>>48512046
AD&D was the first attempt -- EVER -- to make an RPG system that was standardized so that you could join someone else's group and actually know how to play it. Similary, the Dungeon Master's Guide was the first of its kind -- EVER -- as far as a ... guide for an RPG referee.

Additionally, you seem to be deeply confused. Those posts you responded to were referring to 4e companion characters which are very minor and simplified NPCs.

>>48512065

Oh shit, the god changed his mind.

Personally, if I was a DM, I'd like to talk to any players that want to play a monster and have some limits.

(No, you can't be the 4 by 4 Ooze monster, the stats aren't really adaptable into playable character, and if you really want to be sapient slime, just play a friggin' shardmind and I'll let you tweak it a bit)

As a player, I won't play a non-standard character without being provided it, but for a session, there was a good reason I had to be the red dragon, I'd fucking do it.

>>48512107
Is "we're playing Council of Wyrms" a good enough reason to play a red dragon?

>>48512122

Eh, possibly.

I have no idea what "Council of Wyrms" is

>>48512135
Council of Wyrms is a 2e supplement where you play dragons. You also have a minion character to go do normal adventurer stuff like looking for gold for the dragon character to sleep on, but the emphasis is on the dragon.

>>48512151
>Council of Wyrms is a 2e supplement where you play dragons

Nope, not good enough. Playing a dragon is still munchkinry of the highest level.

>>48512065
>>48512107

>Oh shit, the god changed his mind.

No. Anon #1 was quoting Eric Holmes and didn't know it. He was acting out of desperation and you happened to get fished in.

A Centaur, for mechanics purposes, is a human with an extended cab. A werebear is like a single-option druid. Problem?

>>48512184

How can that be Anon #1?

You are Anon #1.

Fuck it.

>>48512166
You don't mix the dragons and the regular adventurers. Dragon PC is for dragon things, minion PC is for normal things.

>>48512166
Well, yes. This, as well as the fact that the supplement was broken as fuck. But there were signs 2nd ed was going downhill long before this.

>>48511428
>Honestly, as much as I love Gary, he was a fairly subpar designer
Stopped reading. Opinion discarded.

>>48512151

Sounds interesting.

If I didn't do it, it would have nothing to do with the concept (and playing a red dragon), just execution and the group I was doing it with.

>>48512184
Is #1 OD&D man? Because I thought OD&D was an Arneson and Gygax job.

>>48512197
I am Anon #1 as concerns quality control.

I was referring to anon #1 in succession of order.

>>48511507
>D&D is an amazing creation, no one here is doubting that,
The fuck? Did I step into a bizarro /tg/?

Can I stay here forever?

>>48512220

No, I'm Anon #1

>>48511658
>he co-wrote D&D
>Implying Arneson ever did anything besides drink company soda

That dude wasn't even a good Ideas Guy, all he ever came up with was blackmoor and the assbackwards mistake that was AC.

>>48512065
>"At the Dungeon Master's discretion a character can be anything his or her player wants him to be. Characters must always start out inexperienced and relatively weak and build on their experience. Thus, an expedition might include, in addition to the four basic classes and races (human, elven, dwarven, halflingish), a centaur, a lawful werebear, and a Japanese Samurai fighting man."

>Eric Holmes 1977

NOT Gygax, who overruled this in '79. And for good reason, because players were drifting away from humanocentric characters and trying to exploit Holmes' good nature.

>>48512249

In so much as having negative AC be better than positive AC?

>>48512269
Sorry, yeah, I should have clarified that I meant specifically the unintuitive feature of making AC count backwards instead of forwards.

>>48512231
Yes-you-are, because they told you so in your special snowflake class. Don't forget to take your ritalin.

File: 51pX5G--wDL.jpg (50KB, 348x500px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 348x500px

>>48512249
On-Topic: This is a must read.

If you have not read it, you might as well leave the thread.

>>48510107
Every day D&D becomes more and more normalized.

It's going to be interesting to see where roleplaying goes in the future.

>>48512263
That's basically the same thing as what's in the '74 box set, so that doesn't come from Holmes.

>>48512065
>Five years earlier
So in other words, he tried it out, learned his lesson, and then tried to pass on his life-experience to us through his words of wisdom?

Got it, Anon.

File: 184pbe.jpg (45KB, 500x303px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 500x303px

>>48512269

>>48512269
I don't understand why a monster listing a to-hit bonus or to-hit penalty on its record sheet and the player listing the target number on his record sheet is so fundamentally mind blowing compared to a monster listing a target number on its record sheet and the player listing a to-hit bonus or penalty on his record sheet.

File: 1443656497082.jpg (331KB, 517x768px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 517x768px

>>48511870
>"I also thing torturing people and slaveholding is natural and good for LG in my setting."

-Gary "Natural 20 to Justify Means" Gygax

>>48512340
So he's either admitting it's a development error, or someone else's fault. Point being that Gygax has the experience and the seniority to say so.

That is, if you can be bothered to cough up the actual quote.

>>48512348

What the hell does two direction mean in this context?

Do you mean rolling two dice?

Eh, not really.

Roll enough dice and you will get the average roll for the die size * the number of dice + or - nothing really interesting.

>>48512372
Oh man, that's rich. Source?

>>48512362

because people can't handle negative numbers.

It's that simple.

File: Lou-Zocchi.jpg (63KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 640x480px

>>48512382
Dice used to be less reliable than they are now (well, the more expensive ones, anyway).

In order to avoid blaming the dice (because back then dice were utter shit as well as HTF), one had to roll over their saving throws and under their ability scores.

^ And since no one knew when a player had to roll what (not even the DM), this ad hoc solution worked just fine until Lou Zocchi came along.

And there are dice collectors that don't even believe him!

>>48512372
Gary originally only had Law and Chaos in D&D. Good and Evil were only added in later. based on Gary's understanding of the Law/Chaos axis I could see how he might end up there.

Also Gary treated alignment a bit like Asimov treated the Three Laws of Robotics. He came up with a cool idea then spent years finding the cracks in it.

>>48512390
True. I didn't want to pile on the fact that players tend to be less math-literate nowadays.

>>48512362
Higher numbers are better numbers for everything except AC, where lower numbers are better. It's jarring.

>>48512278
>unintuitive feature of making AC count backwards instead of forwards

It's not unintuitive if you think of AC 1 as being 1st Class Armor.

>>48512432
Oh fuck, don't bring up goddamn gamescience dice. It's the gamer equivalent of the anti-vaxxer movement.

>>48512325

As it becomes more normalized, more and more women are going to be involved with it. That will bring in dudebros who are chasing the women, and the actual hobbyists will leave since they don't want to be around the dudebros. Since the women don't really want to be there if they aren't going to be worshipped by the hobbyists and don't want to be pursued all the time by the dudebros, they'll leave as well. Then the dudebros will leave, since the women are no longer present.

And then the hobby itself will have died, like so many others before it, all because normal people had to get interested in it.

>>48512390

If you can't handle adding or subtracting negative numbers, you aren't smart enough for this hobby.

>>48512457

Dude, It's not math literacy, it's the ability to compute in your head.

We don't need to subtract numbers that often in modern society, so we don't.

Honestly, there are other areas I would rather stretch my math brain in, so I do.

>>48512373
Men and Magic, bottom of page 8, under Other Character Types.

>>48512498
well meme'd

Have you considered actually going outside and talking to people for once?

>>48511428
That's like saying that Newton was a shitty physicist because he didn't understand the universe as well as later scientists would. Gary was a trailblazer, and without the benefit of thirty plus years of hindsight the rules he came up with were damn good.

>>48512015
Not talking about the old modules, but my old LGS used to do regular "tournaments" where a bunch of players would do a one-off and vote for the MVP at the end. It worked well with that group since nobody was enough of a shit to vote for themselves.

>>48512537

Eh, Newton has some massive holes in his work.

Insisting that light was in particles, and not waves.

Sure, laws of motion were good, but we shouldn't pretend that all of his work is worth well.

At least laws of motion are fairly concise and so can be easily translated for new eras.

>>48512492
If the die floats. . .

>>48512510
Pretty much this.

Math in RPGs needs to be kept as simple as possible. Not because it's "too hard" for people, but because it's faster. The more calculations, and the more complex they are, the longer calculation heavy segments take (typically combat). This takes away from time better spent on RPing or doing cool shit.

Addition is the easiest for people to do. It doesn't matter whether you belong in Mensa or on a short bus, addition is faster. Not by a lot usually, but it adds up over a session.

>>48512498
Why didn't you just post the actual meme instead of having to type all that shit? Was it cathartic for you or something?

>>48512600

He could have copy pasted some bits.

>>48512516
Awesome. So he's either admitting it's a development error, or someone else's fault (probably Arneson). Point being that Gygax has the experience and the seniority to say so.

>>48512372
it'd help if you read the 1e DMG explanation of the alignments, genius. Not to mention he was the inventor of the concept of "Lawful Good" and so can define it however he likes

>>48512614

Dude hasn't been in the trenches as a player.

>>48512579
>Eh, Newton has some massive holes in his work.

And we landed on the moon with it regardless. You can GTFO now.

>>48512624

bullshit.

You pronounce .gif like gift.

>>48512591
What if you really don't want to play with people who just got off a short bus?

Think of it as a literacy test for voting.

>>48512579
>Eh, Newton has some massive holes in his work.

>Casually dismissing one of the most influential scientists in history as if you could have done better

Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8.

>>48512600

Because I couldn't find the image.

And just because it's a meme doesn't mean it's not true. Only because this gives context, I'm a girl who's watched a good half-dozen college groups get killed by the exact process laid out in the meme. Pretty girls (of which I am not) come in because they hear the game is fun, they get chased in, and the people who just like to roll dice and tell stories get pushed out or leave from frustration.

>>48512498

Plenty of girls play D&D and other RPGs.

>>48512638
The "g" in ".gif" stands for "general," therefore "gif" is pronounced like "jiff."

>>48512486
>It's not unintuitive if...
If your sentence starts like this, by default the item you're talking about is unintuitive.

>>48512614
what if I told you Advanced Dungeons and Dragons was never supposed to be an identical game to Dungeons and Dragons?

what if I told you that OD&D had several different combat resolution mechanics and depending on supplements ranged from an extension of Chainmail to a weird proto-AD&D?

what if I told you Gygax himself pointed out D&D and AD&D have different standards?

>>48512651

Dude was literally publishing the results of experiments that said light was a wave. Insisted light was otherwise.

Light having some particle light properties was just lucky for making Newton not seem completely un scientific.

>>48512650
As I said in my post. It doesn't matter whether you're short bus or not. EVERYONE can do basic addition faster than they can do basic subtraction. It's just a larger difference for idiots.

>>48512627
Exactly. Hindsight really is 20/20 in this game. When you DM for the first time, you run into all kinds of crazy situations. Personally, I'm sick and tired of watching all the illiterate shitposts from people that never even tried to benefit off the experience of someone like Gygax, who spent literally thousands of hours in game development.

>>48512669

The e in laser is "emitted" so you shouldn't use the "er" sound you should make the "ir" sound.

>>48512669
I will fucking cut your throat

>>48512690
guess its a good thing that 99% of PCs and monsters that show up will have positive values then?

I vastly prefer ascending AC and always convert to ascending when playing TSR editions, but the meme that THAC0 is some kind of incomprehensible mind shattering eldritch thaumaturgy that is a super big deal has got to die.

>>48512624
All I needed was to read his stupid ass forum post on the subject to know he's a fucking retard. All I needed was to read your post to know you're a retard, too.

>>48512719
Oh, I agree. THAC0's main problem really isn't the subtraction bit. It's just a symptom of major problem older D&D editions had: Inconsistency. Some times you want a high roll, sometimes you want a low roll. Trying to remember which is which slows things down (especially for lesser used parts of the system). It's much easier to just have everything be one or the other.

>>48512719

People pretend that Non-Euclidian Space is something special but guess what?

The world is a sphere that we mostly experience as a plane, so it turns out the natural world is hard for humans to parse anyway.

>>48512660
Because they're pussies. I've been there. I was a DM at a law university. All that happened and you have to address the issue out in the open and in a polite-but-firm manner. Shit, "DM-as-crowd-management" is a necessary qualification on the resume.

Aside: Someone out there really does consider you pretty. So don't knock yourself. There's so many crazy fetishes out there, you'll surely float someone's boat. My BFF just told me he goes weak for chicks with rly big noses.

^Just in case there really are girls on the internet *I WANT TO BELIEVE*

>>48512660
I can smell your jealousy. It's pretty foul.

File: cSpEzMf.jpg (30KB, 624x352px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 624x352px

>>48512687

>>48512722
Your feelings are THAT badly hurt by not understanding alignments, that having someone explain them to you hurt your feelings even worse? Sad!

>>48512747
>Some times you want a high roll, sometimes you want a low roll.

I can't help but wonder why, in the past 200 years of wargaming, that no one else noticed this. Maybe the flip-flop was done on purpose to boost randomization.

When I was yer age, a natural 20 meant something!

Or, maybe you flip-flopped

>>48512790

What evidence do you have that his feelings were hurt?

You and he seem awfully similar in tone.

>>48512686
part of intuition is cultural understanding friend. We have decades of distance between us and descending AC. Most people who pick up a copy of D&D now don't have the war games experience Gygax and his development group had. They also are more likely to have played CRPGs that almost always make the numbers go up. I'm not saying that to a person now the idea doesn't seem a bit funny. I'm saying that back then the idea was significantly less jarring. Like how if you threw a person 300 years into the past there would be things that they might not get. That a person born and raised in that time would have picked up by being exposed to them all their life.

So when I say "it works if you think of AC 1 as 1st Class Armor" i say that as a person who had it explained to me back when I started playing in the 80's.

So yes it's not unintuitive if you have a scope greater than your preferences and the room you're sitting in right now.

>>48512829

>>48512722

>>48512839

Calling someone a fucking retard means that one's feelings are hurt?

>>48512747

The only thing that slowed it down was when bonuses to hit started to proliferate, imo. That was the exact cause of ascending AC being necessary.

>>48512828
It doesn't boost randomization. You can put all numbers into high roll = good territory without reducing randomness in any way.

>>48512843

In this context, sure.

>>48512660
> they get chased in,

Like, this mob of perverts is chasing a girl and the DM is all like, "Quick, you can hide in here under the table!

>and the people who just like to roll dice and tell stories get pushed out

HOW? PHYSICALLY? WTF?

>or leave from frustration

Because everyone is so socially stunted they can't move the game to a more private area? Or post a fucking sign? Or tell Dudebros, "Hey, we don't piss all over your Dudebros meetings! (?)"

Seriously?

>>48512866

All it actually does is make it hard to describe what a good roll is for a system.

Everything else it does is an issue of faith

>>48512838
Well said. Therefore. . .

CONCLUSION: “Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.” ― Edmund Burke

>>48512838
>part of intuition is cultural understanding friend.
No, not at all, friend. Something being intuitive means that you can pick it up and discern it's purpose or function right away. While not all things are perfectly intuitive, it's not an on-off switch. It's a sliding scale.

AC counting backwards is something that most people aren't going to get period. Arneson came up with it because that was how the Navy classified the hull's sturdiness. The function of class can go forwards or backwards, as well. There's no formal rule stating that Class 1 is better than Class 2. The only difference is they signify there IS a difference between the two.

You can also discern the fact that AC counting backwards was confusing because by the time 2nd edition rolled around, there were actual rules in the back that gave advice on how to convert to ascending AC, and the fact that only grognards afraid of change condemned the fact that AC was permanently changed in 3rd edition to count up.

Even if you want to make the argument that D&D was presented first to a war gaming crowd, that crowd was incredibly small and niche, counting upwards of maybe 500 people over a single state and it's surrounding neighbors. When D&D was released, this number skyrocketed, and this number grew upwards in a time period where the rules were incredibly malleable.

No matter how you slice it, those rules are unintutive and should have been changed since the beginning.

>>48512892

An attack spell prompts a d20 roll. A high roll means the spell fails.
A player attacking prompts a d20 roll. A high roll means the hit succeeds.
A monster attacking a player prompts a d20 roll. A high roll means the PC failed to defend himself.

But seriously, I don't know why this was brought up in relevance to THAC0 as THAC0 is always "good roll good"

>>48512866
>It doesn't boost randomization. You can put all numbers into high roll = good territory without reducing randomness in any way.

^ Unless the dice were sub-par.

Is the light bulb starting to glow a bit. . .now?

>>48512920

Whereas 4e has the simple,

If you roll high, it is good for you and bad for the opponent.

It's literally 1 line vs. three, and nobody is tripping over what should happen or attempting to remember who is supposed to roll.

>>48512917
>and the fact that only grognards afraid of change condemned the fact that AC was permanently changed in 3rd edition to count up.

Because it let all the retards in!

>>48512669
Actually its graphic, as in Graphics Interchange Format. And its pronunciation follows the basic system most people intuit of it being gift without the t, instead of the unintuitive pronunciation of the crappy peanut butter brand.

The creator of the format is literally fighting human nature and the english language.

>>48512955
4e has all of those three, except stuff that prompts saving throws is usually predated by an attack roll as well.

>>48512956
The rest of 3.PF being a disaster that ruined a generation of gamers is another subject entirely. Ascending AC had been in the works for a long while and it was one of the few fantastic changes that was made. I may personally dislike it, but I will give credit where it is due.

>>48512934

What the fuck does sub par even mean in this context?

Fucked RNG?

Is it really important to have all casting effects succeed, and all attack rolls fail. (assuming that the die are fucked towards low numbers)?

>>48512934
Having subpar tools is not even close to an argument for purposefully obfuscate mechanics.

>>48512917
>No matter how you slice it, those rules are unintutive and should have been changed since the beginning.

The only question is, "how much?" WOTC changes rules more than they change their underwear. Especially with MTG.

Whatever happened to, "If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it?"

>>48512968

4e doesn't have a high roll means a spell fails.

and really, the second and third are the same thing.

Not sure why monster attacks and player attacks are separate if not magical, but are lumped when they are.

Maybe the system has broken you.

>>48512986
>Whatever happened to, "If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it?"
It rightfully died out when people realized that it was the slogan of the lazy who wanted to stop forward progress for the sake of comfort.

>>48512986

I'm pretty sure that WotC changes their collective underwear more than once a quarter.

>>48512828

There was a whole conversation about it up-thread, but essentially dice were of poor quality, and people were cheating shits. Early D&D was much more adversarial between the DM and players, so having a mix of roll under/over kept cheaters from being able to weight their dice (most people might have only one set at the time) Also it kept dice from absolutely screwing you because one side came out of the mold denser than the other.

There is also the simulation reason for the mixed system. Gygax and Co. were historical wargamers before they made D&D so many of their rules adapted from wargames they had written. Imagine the simplest way you might do rules for moral. As the moral of troops drops they are harder to control so you have to roll under their moral score to keep them from routing. While some rules (like say firing cannons accurately) might take a bonus from the unit and modify it requiring that you beat a set number to succeed (+x for skilled crew -y for range -z for obstacles roll a 7 or better on 2 dice to hit on target otherwise consult the deviation table on page 13.)

>>48512999
>4e doesn't have a high roll means a spell fails.

It does have "a high roll means your spell only lasts one round."

>>48513071

That's more of a high roll to shake stuff off during your own turn.

If it's your turn, or your character is actively attacking/doing something, you make the roll, and high rolls are good.

>>48513061

Well Gygax and Co were stupid shits for using wargaming rules to govern their RPGs. Roleplaying games are a different beast and they should have known that.

>>48513127
That's a pretty good bait.

>>48513061

Wouldn't you be able to fix your character's attacks and spell resistance that way?

It doesn't work.

>>48511316

You know, his catalog of important post D&D RPGs like Cyborg Commando, Dangerous Journeys and Lejendary Adventures (sic). Who wouldn't pay millions to get control of that catalog?

File: Waybackmachine3.png (72KB, 400x267px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 400x267px

>>48512974
Come with me Sherman, we'll take the Wayback machine.

Regardless if one rejects the theory that dice started out as literally bones (hence, "knucklebones"), ancient dice tended to be handmade and were never well randomized.

Later on, we have mass-manufactured dice, but still there is a variation in quality when it comes to randomness. Casino dice are generally regarded as having the highest precision for randomness. Especially due to their hard edge.

Now, if one follows the reasoning of Lou Zocchi, the rock tumblers used to manufacture your average $6 set of Chessex dice have an effect on the randomness of your roll.

But the dice I'm talking about came before this. Especially those light blue pieces of shit in the white, red, and blue box sets before the mid-80s.

Moreover, dice were hard to acquire in early (A)D&D. Usually the DM had to roll them for every player, or they'd pass the one set around. Often, "blaming the dice," or dice superstitions pop up in every group, but sometimes it really is the fault of the dice manufacture.

Meaning the random factor of having to roll a save vs. roll ability vs. roll combat became a randomizing factor of its own. <-- Add this to your game, all the while changing the direction (ascending/descending) for each stat, and your shit dice become somewhat more tolerable.

My point? Playing a "d20 System" game with shitty dice is less random than playing a "pre-d20" system with shitty dice.

Anyone playing with precision cast titanium dice (for example) are still a rare encounter. Mostly because new gamers aren't discerning enough or live on a limited income and thus end up buying shitty dice.

>>48513154
In a system that utilizes both, if you fix it in one particular way, you were bound to get screwed in another, like when you had to roll under a stat to avoid something bad happening to you.

It doesn't work now because polyhedrals are incredibly easy to come by now, so most games just build in one direction based on an honor system.

I think that's also a major part of why the DMG no longer comes with a warning on the front that says "This is for DMs only. Players stay out." It's too easy to just get a copy of it now, and also the fact that others might decide to run as well.

>>48513154
I don't follow.

>>48512974
(assuming that the die are fucked towards low numbers)?

Or fucked towards high numbers. You wouldn't want your DM to roll at you with one of those. You wouldn't want your mind-controlled alignment-changed comrade to roll at you with one of those.

>>48513190

If high rolls happen more often, physical attacks will hit and spells will be saved against.

>>48513201

How is your DM going to do those things without you saving against those?

>>48512985
>Having subpar tools is not even close to an argument for purposefully obfuscate mechanics.

Fallacy of assertion noted.

How do you know for certain they didn't?

Again, 200 years of wargaming with real veterans, generals, and kings based on real artillery charts and tables used IRL, and you're gonna tell me some 3rd edition punk was the first to consider the issue?

>>48513230

I'm not convinced that actual soldiers would be good at telling you how you should do your dice games.

Or how template moving would be useful.

>>48513230
>How do you know for certain they didn't?
Because it's pretty well documented how and why they came up with that shit through interviews and books written about them.

>>48513127
This bait, is awesome.

>>48513243
>Because it's pretty well documented how and why they came up with that shit through interviews and books written about them.

Because there's still major holes in RPG history and they're discovering something new all the time.

http://playingattheworld.blogspot.com/2016/02/a-conversation-with-len-patt.html

>>48513240

I mean, if you are doing wargames with a map with thousands of men represented, why would you model out each individual personal attack?

>>48513275
Meaning that there are some guys out there who were huge influences on D&D, but don't know it, have moved on, or are dead.

So no. Far from, "pretty well documented."

>>48513275
>>48513293
Um, what the hell does what you said and what you've posted have anything to do with the conversation, or even the subject at hand?

All you posted was an article where they found a previously unknown potential connection. How exactly does this prove that any of the development of D&D is not "pretty well documented"? Did you suddenly erase all of the actual interviews between Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson who were alive all the way through the early 2000s? Do you think finding out a tentative connection between two things somehow proves that there is that much more to discover?

Did you really think what you posted had any merit as an argument whatsoever?

Are you retarded?

>>48513203
But you would never make ability checks or thief skills, or any other roll where low is good. That was the point to make the low ends of the dice good for some things.

I remember a guy once sat down at a 2e game I was running, and, after being handed a pregen'd character, proceeded to do the roll and snatch on an ability check. Before I could explain that low was good for ability checks, he proclaimed he had rolled a nat 20. One of the other players told him he had failed, and why. Dude turned bright red and stopped with the tricky dice rolls for the rest of the game.

This is why the no context "roll me a d20" is a thing. Players wouldn't lie about the dice if they had no idea what was coming.

>>48513240

>I'm not convinced that actual soldiers would be good at telling you how you should do your dice games.

Spin noted. I said wargames for a reason.

"I know he's a good general, but is he lucky?" - Napoleon Bonaparte

RNG was an absolute necessity in wargaming, because you needed to simulate real unknowns in war. IOW, if you cheated on the tabletop, your own troops could very well die IRL.

Conversely, it's the munchkin's job to "break" RNG to his/her advantage.

http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/lesson-gamers-rng/

>>48513325
>Um, what the hell does what you said and what you've posted have anything to do with the conversation, or even the subject at hand?

And you obviously don't give a shit to begin with. Asking me to spoonfeed it to you is a dead giveaway.

>>48513325
>Did you suddenly erase all of the actual interviews between Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson who were alive all the way through the early 2000s?

RPGs weren't developed 'ex nihilo.' These guys started out as wargamers. They also couldn't read the mind or intent of every designer they encountered, whether in print or IRL. And they were influenced by a lot of designers.

What I'm saying is that, either intentionally or unintentionally, alternating tables add another level of randomization to dice that may or may not be perfectly random.

>>48512689
Yeah, he also worked furiously to try and prove himself wrong on other observations so he could claim God was directly behind certain things.

Newton was a nutter. But on the other hand, I have to hand it to him for not compromising the science for his own ends. He played it straight and had integrity.

>>48513390

Its a fairly ridiculous assumption to the point that I think you're merely pretending to be retarded, as they don't even use the same frikkin dice for roll under and roll over: morale is 2d10 roll under, there are some d100 roll under, but roll under ability checks didn't come out until much later.

>>48513410

Exactly,

It's important to not deify our progenitors.

They were great, but we shouldn't take their texts as gospel.

>>48511720
>Example: Why can't I play as a monster?
>Gygax addressed that.

His rationale for not allowing monster PCs is a twisted pretzel of illogical thinking. Hardly a good example. His rationalization of race level limits is even worse. Fortunately better designers than him dropped those arbitrary restrictions like a hot potato.

File: grumble.jpg (19KB, 155x228px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 155x228px

>>48510107
So to address the OP, what can a Transformers movie producer actually DO with "Gygax's Catalog" of random notes?

There's already a D&D movie coming and it's not going to be based on this.

>>48515802
And in so doing created more problems then they solved that are now so engrained in the mindset, they are nearly impossible to excise.
A net loss.

>>48513482
Incorrect. Basic Edition uses them for a fact as you can see the rules in the back of the book.

>>48512505

This is why normal people hate you.

>>48516002
>And in so doing created more problems then they solved

such as?

>>48512046
>"The less intelligent players who demand to play monster characters regardless of obvious >consequences will soon remove themselves from play in any event, for their own ineptness will >serve to have players or monsters or traps finish them off."
>Players who want monster PCs are retards who commit sudoku

These are just insults in prettier dress. Gygax never actually presents a rational argument against monster PCs.

>>48512838
not that guy but we don't live in a period where inconsistent numbers make sense. A significant number of the systems present in tabletop wargames have been converted into videogames as under the hood number crunching. (anyone who plays Battletech will tell you that it's a fuck of a lot easier to have 4 mech matches with a dedicated computer for number crunching than trying to do it by hand. That's really just a symptom of Btech being so simulationist though.)

Were Gygax and his associated circle trailblazers in RPGs? Sure, no need to try and contradict that, or state that D&D is bad in and of itself.

But the RPG market is saturated with all manner of systems that make use of modern sensibilities so yes, descending AC is counterintuitive to todays mindset. Much like many older methods of doing things would be.

How things were done in the past is irrelevant except in making things done in the present easier. A sensible man doesn't push a boulder up a hill if he doesn't have to.

>>48512660
People blaming the system for their own faults as a person, more at 11.

>>48512492
Wait
what?

>>48512306

this anon speaks truly, pretty much everything being said about gygax's contribution to OD&D in this thread is bullshit that peterson's book dispels