g026r wrote:
No no no no no.  Heathens get burnt.  It's the rustlers that we hang.

Badmike wrote: D&D didn't really encourage roleplaying until post-Dragonlance/early 2E.
...
None of the classic 1E modules (S-series, Giant Series, D-Series)had any sorts of nods to roleplaying encounters or characters.  Interestingly when the Brits jumped in (U-series, UK series) it is noted that SMALL tidbits of roleplaying started to filter their way in (blame Shakespeare I guess, its in the blood!!!!).  
Mike B.

JasonZavoda wrote:
Good lord you gamed with a bunch of munchkins.

I thought munchkins didn't exist until 2E...  

Unless your DM completely ignored the way that G1 was designed there was no way to hack your way through it and survive. There are about 30 Hill Giants at the start of the scenario with reinforcements that will begin appearing after they've taken their first setback. 7th to 9th level AD&D characters just cannot stand toe-to-toe a large group of Hill Giants and not get beaten to a pulp, though being captured and sent to the dungeon level to lead an orcish rebellion is one of the possible sub-plots.

What you meant to say was "We didn't play the module the way you did, so we played it wrong".  There is a perception among a lot of games, old timers especially, that the "right" way is the way they did it.  "There is no way to hack your way through it and survive" is just plain ignorant.  I've run this scenario at least half a dozen times, and half the time the group did just that, hacked through it.  Give me a break. No one here got a telegram from EGG with secret instructions on the "right" way to run G1-3.

Yes, a party consisting of a 9th level mage, two elven fighter mages of 8/9 level, three 8th dwarven fighters, two 9th clerics, and a couple of 9th thieves (my original gaming group) CAN stand toe to toe and beat the living hell out of a bunch of hill giants after the mages have snuck into the great hall and peppered it with fireballs, cloudkill, confusion, etc.   All that with VERY low magic in terms of armor and weapons. Christ, did you play a bunch of stupid hill giants like Rommell?  They are HILL GIANTS...Nosnra is NOT the DM, he shouldn't be PLAYED like the DM, he's stupid.  Cunning, and perhaps smart for a hill giant, but he's not as intelligent as the dumbest dwarf in the party above.  Not to mention when you take him out FIRST, the bunch of hill giants SHOULD degenerate into simpletons wanting to bash the little people with their clubs. That's IF you are dming correctly and not trying to recreate some Machiavellian exercise of utmost deviousness....

Put it this way.....THEY ARE SO STUPID THEIR GUARDS ARE DRUNK ON DUTY.  Enough said.

I've had groups sneak in through the wolf's den.  I've had groups sneak to the lower level and try to take that out first (came closest to dying, that one). I've had groups attack, then have to retreat (giving the giants time to regroup). And I've had a group or two (mostly groups with dwarves and powerful mages) stand toe to toe and chop the giants in half. (Aside: dwarf in platemail & shield=AC2; -4 giants AC-2 and that's BEFORE any magical aid...)  Didn't say no one was injured or no one died, or that it wasn't a pretty nasty scene after it was over, but it CAN happen. The fact you think it CAN'T happen shows a disturbing lack of.....imagination and creativity...

That little 8 page module is a prime example of 1e roleplaying.

No, actually it's not.  It's probably the purest example of hack and slash D&D gaming every published. Besides sneaking in and ambushing the giants at dinner, and some of the more interesting stuff in the lower level (orc rebellion, the evil temple, the carrion crawler caves), there isn't a lot of "roleplaying" to go around except maybe convincing the orcs to help out your party in an all out attack. I personally don't give a limp wristed crap what Nosnra's "motivations" and "emotions" and "inner feelings" are, and neither does any adventurer worth his salt.  If YOU put a lot of roleplaying excess into it, that's fine.  The text doesn't support you, sorry.  

It's just that the DM needs to use creativity to flesh it out. The skeleton of the adventure is there, and a good DM can wing a great deal by using that strong base, but just running it as a hackfest is an amazingly empty experience.

I absolutely disagree.  We had a blast.  Every single time, with every single group. Now, YOU may have not had a blast with our style...but to attempt to quantify MY experiences within G1 is the height of arrogance, egoism and superiority.  Man, sometimes a cigar is just a good smoke, and sometimes a 1E module is just an excuse to carve up some monsters.  Get over yourself and your highfalutin' ways. Next you'll be telling me the hill giant subchief has an illegitimate child by his old girlfriend, an evil twin, and a old sword wound in his right pinkie that causes him to wince when he swings. WHO FREAKING CARES.

AD&D is about imagination, sometimes imagination has been so beaten down that kids and especially adults have forgotten what it is like.

I think we get the point...anyone who played 1E like you did was a creative genius; anyone who played any other version of said game was a clueless, no imagination hack.  Is there another drum for you to bang on? I'm surprised that the film, book, and gaming industry hasn't just folded up shop by now, since ALL imagination in the world disappeared after 1986 or so....

Of course back when 1e was the only game around if anyone made a crack about roleplaying I'd just hold their head in the toilet long enough for them to decide exactly how mistaken they actually were. Making them dance on the lunch table afterwards was just for fun.

islestrike wrote:
It is interesting that you make note of this Mike, because these days I'm finding that for whatever reason many people seem to reverse the two.  That is there seems to be this perception that "old school" has something to do with hammy acting and cheesy accents, and later editions like 3E and 4E are all about rolling the dice.  You hear it in the disadain of people who deride games that emphasize "roll play" over "role play", and by "role play" they seem to mean playing in character.  In fact it is the opposite as you mention, and easy to see why.  Players who really identify and live vicariously through their characters are the ones who a) tend to hammy acting and b) will choose later editions that cater more to their PC.

As originally played games like OD&D and AD&D were about careful exploration of the unknown, information gathering, subtle problem solving, and then busting out the dice and killing things and taking their stuff.

Cheers!

Badmike wrote:
Crap like this makes me glad I gamed with the group of guys I did.  Anyone who made crack about roleplaying back in the day would be answered by "What, you wanna "act out" some shit?  Maybe you should take a drama class, John Travolta".  I can only imagine some of the "exciting" times around your table where no dice were rolled all evening, no monsters were slain, and a lot of interesting "conversation" was had...what drivel.   If I tried that touchy-feely stuff with ANY of the groups I've dm'd, they would have lynched AND burned me, and likely pissed in the ashes.

Mike B.

BTW, most groups I've run with also hacked their way through G2....and G3....oh, except for that one time we disguised ourselves as travelling gypsies and somehow snuck into the Glacial Rift, only to disarm the Jarl and his wife with a scintillating riddle contest...not a dice was rolled that evening!!!  

JasonZavoda wrote:
There is roleplaying true and then there is munckinism. 2e didn't invent it but it did take that walk down the yellowbrick road with the lollipop gang. What a sad and mundane experience 1e must have seemed.

That your groups hacked there way through G2 and G3 comes as no surprise.

flying_purple_monkfish wrote:Aww no locking! I was about to be lynched THEN burnt... or maybe burnt then lynched... oooo the options! How about some beheading too? ooo and demolishing my house and salting the land, they did that to traitors lol.