Your Party Had Better Have More Than Four People In It - Hints for Players and GMs

When I was just starting out as a wee DM of 11 years old I had to make due with the players I could find. Before too long I was good at recruiting and training players. I typically had 3-7 people at the table with me.
But I always had 6+ characters in the party. Sure, sometimes they were henchmen, but always 6 or more.
When I joined Lew Pulsipher's group he had a pretty firm rule - at least 6 'tough guys' (meaning PCs or close-to-PC-level henchmen) in the party. Eight full PCs and their henchmen is best.

FORTY. YEARS. and a sale. And a prize

40 years ago today I sat down with a small group of college freshmen and rolled up an Elf. I was only 9 years old. The DM's girlfriend *insisted* that he let me play [thanks, Kim!].
We went into a dungeon - I went first. 90 feet in, I fell into a pit trap and I died.
Another player helped me roll up a replacement, and I rolled a paladin!

The Elf is long gone, but I still have and sometimes play that paladin.

I mentioned to the guy at the bookstore that I was playing. He ordered the books for me and pointed out Traveller, that had just arrived.
  I got the monster manual for Christmas.

  In the years since I have played and sometimes run:
2300 AD, Aberrant, Indiana Jones, Aftermath!, Alternity, Amber, Ars Magica, Beyond the Supernatural, BESM, Boot Hill, B&B, Bureau 13, CoC , Castles and Crusades, Champions , oWoD, Chivalry and Sorcery, Conan, CORPS, Cyberpunk and FNFF, DC, Elric!, EotPT, Fading Suns, FUDGe and Fuzion, Gangbusters, Ghostbusters, Space Opera, Godlike, HackMaster (both versions, early memebr of the HMGMA and early pre-orderer of books), HARP, Heros Unlimited, In Nomine, Jorune, Marvel, Mechwarrior, Mercenaries, Spies, and Private Eyes, Metamorphosis Alpha, MERP, Morrow Project, Ninjas and Stupid Guys, Over the Edge, Palladium, Paranoia, Pendragon, Prime Directive, Psiworld, Rifts, Robotech, RuneQuest, Sailor Moon, Shadowrun, Space 1889, Spacemaster, Star Frontiers, Star*Drive, Star Trek (most versions), Superworld, Bushido,Talislanta, TMNTAOS, TFOS, Timelords, TOON, Top Secret, TORG, Traveller (all versions, although the LBBs are best), Trinity, Twilight 2000, and, of course, D20, D6, and GURPS. And my favorite non-D&D game, Rolemaster.
  I am certain I missed a few.

  My wife and I spent our second date playing WEG's Star Wars. Half of all the Christmas presents I have ever received are RPG related. I have met amazing people at gaming tables and many a friendship has been forged over badly-photocopied character sheets.

  On the 16th and 17th (Thursday and Friday this week) I will be having a 50% off sale at RGNow.

  Today, though, is a special giveaway to celebrate!

  I will be posting this on Google+ under 'public' and my collection for 'tabletop roleplaying games' and in a few communities. Tomorrow morning the Fun Lads Four will make a list of everyone who makes a comment on one of these entries and my dear wife will randomly draw two names.
  Those two people will get a prize! The can choose from
1) A free copy of The Book of Seaward - my complete add-on rules for AD&D 1e that are never sold.
or
2) Free copies of all of my stuff on RPGNow.
or
3) A write up of the top four levels of Skull Mountain, including the sublevels
0r
4) I create a new, custom adventure for them in one of the following game systems: D&D 1e, 2e, 3e; Rolemaster; HERO; Classic Traveller.

  Good luck and good gaming!

Play Report: Old-School Take on 3e, First Session & Second Session

  As I had mentioned a short time ago, the Fun Lads Four and I decided to try to make 3e as OSRish as possible and try it out.

The Setup:
Classes- PHB classes only. Some are limited (Druids must pick the one combat-worthy wildshape form they can take, for example).
Skills- PHB only
Feats- PHB only and not all are available (Natural Spell, for example, isn't to be found)
Prestige Classes- Some from the DMG
  In general, splatbooks don't exist (although we are told 'there might be psionics. Or not. If there are, they were always there. If not,t hey were never there'.)

Players and Characters:
I played Janusz- 1st level human Cleric
Jen played Mary- 1st level elven ranger (bow path)
Sam played Frederick- 1st level human paladin
Nick played Kedrick- 1st level human rogue
Jack was DM

How We "Fix" 3e - a Short Post

From years and years of not having access to anything else, I have a few cubic meters of AD&D 3e books. Working for Fast Forward as a freelancer added to that, as did freelance copyediting for, oh, half of the d20 explosion guys. They are all neatly stored in my (finished) basement. About once a year my wife has to convince me not to sell them.

Son #1 pulled a few out last week.

For the last three days he and I have been discussing them and there was a lot of,
  "Why do people say 3e wizards are overpowered?"
  "Huh. Why do people think this feat works a way it doesn't?"
  etc.

So over the last two days he's decided to run a short 3e campaign in a unique setting.  But it led us to talk about What's Wrong with 3e and how to fix it.

Our takeaways:

1) The GM must keep tight control over what prestige classes exist. The creep and bloat of splatbooks can make a campaign collapse.

2) The GM must carefully control the magic items in the campaign. This ranges from 'no, you can't buy potions from a street vendor' up to using items that grow. While this may sound too obvious, the implied/assumed setting of 3e appears to be awash in magic items!

3) The GM must throttle access to spells for wizards and sorcerers and make sure cleric spell selections make sense in the context of the domains, deity, and alignment of divine spellcasters.

4) The GM must control access to feats, especially advanced ones.

5) Challenge ratings must be based on the level of play not the level of PCs.

This is from an old 3e campaign of mine- 6) Consider making the Barbarian and the Druid NPC classes

7) Play the rules as written.

  We'll be trying this out over the next few weeks. We think with GM oversight and cooperative players we can have a 3e game with a real 2e feel and play!

RPGaDAY: Best Session of the Last Year

This was a rough one to choose, but luckily I already gave a write up here.

RPGaDAY: Dice

  I prefer dice but I also have two dice rolling programs on my phone and, Back in the Day, I even used (someone else's) Dragonbone die roller.
  All else being equal I like dice in and of themselves. They can be very decorative, they make fine gifts, and they are a physical reminder of the randomness of our largely mental hobby.
So: Dice first, then random numbers.

  I have seldom played diceless, but that's fine, too.

RPGaDAY: Dice

  I prefer dice but I also have two dice rolling programs on my phone and, Back in the Day, I even used (someone else's) Dragonbone die roller.
  All else being equal I like dice in and of themselves. They can be very decorative, they make fine gifts, and they are a physical reminder of the randomness of our largely mental hobby.
So: Dice first, then random numbers.

  I have seldmom played diceless, but that's fine, too.

G.K. Chesterton's Fence, AD&D 1e, and What Happens When You Don't Understand What You Are Changing - A Varied Rant

  The subheading on my blog warns you about my rants.

  G.K. Chesterton was a prolific writer of the early 20th Century who once told a parable about reform and a fence, which I will paraphrase

  Two men are enjoying a pleasant stroll through the country when they come upon a fence barring their way. This rather stout, well-maintained fence stretches from the thick forest on each side and completely blocks the trail.

  The first man looks at it and declares,
  "I do not understand why this fence is here; I will tear it down so I may continue to enjoy my stroll!"

  The second man replies,
  "If you do not understand why this fence is here you certainly should not tear it down." "What if it prevents a mad bull from running wild? Go, research and think about it and once you understand why it is here, then you might still want to tear it down."

  This is a simple concept - understand why before you remove or change - that seems to escape a lot of people. Especially some in gaming.

  In high school I had a friend named George who ran a game of AD&D 1e. We had two players that were in both groups and he and I spoke about the game fairly often. One of our 'shared' players, a guy named Brent, loved to play elves but hated, hated, hated, the level limits on elves. He argued with me often that he should be able to go to any level he could as an elf. I always said no.
  George said 'ok' and removed all level limits on all demi-humans. Then he removed all class limits. Then he removed all characteristic limits from demi-humans. He had removed alignment restrictions to classes before any of this.
  Then he was wondering why there were so many half-orc fighter/assassins in his game. Never mind the slew of elven fighter/magic-users with castles. And no human PCs.

  They did not understand the why of class, level, and stat requirements in AD&D 1e and they tore them out without understanding them. As a result, they had a wild bull get loose.

  If you look at the 1e limitations on demi-humans you see some interesting things:

1. Only Humans, Half-orcs, and strong Dwarves are establishing domain fortresses
2. Only Half-orcs can't establish a thieves guild
3. Only Humans, Half-elves, and Half-orcs can be cleric PCs and only Humans are any good at it

  Not only do these restrictions make guys who can, say, wear armor while casting Lightning Bolt rare and therefore more interesting, it means there are great reasons for playing humans - the domain game.

-------------------------------------------------

  In 1e half-elves and gnomes have access to classes other demi-humans can't be: half-elves can be rangers, gnomes can be illusionists. Half-elves are (in my experience) popular because they have so many possible multi-class combinations but gnomes have that sweet niche of being illusionist/somethings. Who doesn't want a fighter/illusionist or illusionist/thief in the party?!

  In 3e there was a decision to let any race be any class. Sure they tried to give a sop to things by saying some races were 'better suited' to certain classes, but especially for gnomes that changed around a bit, etc.
  When 4e came out I remember reading a statement from one of the designers about why gnomes had become 'monsters'. He said [paraphrased] "Well, they were just a lot like dwarves and we really didn't understand why anyone would play them or what they were for."
  OK, leaving aside the different flavors of elf available, the reason that gnomes had nothing special about them because the designers of 3e removed what made them special! Team A tore down a fence they didn't understand and that resulted in Team B not really grasping why those post holes were all over the place.

  Half-elves and Half-orcs are, as I mentioned, the only demi-humans that can be cleric PCs. Despite the low level cap this works out to be an advantage because this makes these races the source of multi-class clerics, combos that are always welcome in any party. If you let every demi-human be a cleric and expand the access to multi-class combinations there is no reason to play a half-elf - after all, if elves, who have better bonuses, etc., can do the same thing being an elf makes more meta-sense than being a half-elf.

-------------------------------------------------

  There are plenty of other examples. The most common one I see is 'Gee, I don't understand alignment, so I removed it' followed by 'why do all my players play murderhobos?!'.
 It's a puzzle.

-------------------------------------------------

At the end of the day (and near the end of my rant!) the radical changes by some who want to 'fix' level limits, racial class restrictions, and even alignment where these limits are replaced by nothing reveal mainly two things about the people making the changes: they don't understand the why of these game elements and they don't grasp that Gary was actually a competent, good, even great game designer.

-------------------------------------------------

End Rant.