There’s even a “Racial Preferences Table” in the Player’s Handbook, which is referenced here. The fact that the various fantasy races don’t get along with one another is well documented. Unfortunately, for every great section like “Monsters and Organizations,” there’s a section like “Use of non-human troops,” which is gratuitously useless. In fact I wrote that just a moment ago, just scroll up to the previous section! Often in these fourteen posts so far, I’ve written that some section or another ought to be included in modern RPG texts. Yes, much of the book is amazing and awesome. A book which got it right, while so many modern books somehow get it wrong. A work so profoundly insightful and ahead of its time, that even modern works which attempt to build on its success have not made it irrelevant. Use of Non-Human Troops: When I started reading the DMG, all I knew about it was that a lot of people consider it to be one of the most important RPG books ever written. I would honestly say I learned something from this section. It’s one thing to say over-and-over again that the GM should control the monsters and NPCs intelligently, it’s a different thing entirely to have detailed examples for undead, giant ants, orcs, a small town, a bandit camp, and a fortress. Gary goes through six different groups the players might attack, and provides two examples for how each might react with the first being how they would react to the initial attack, and the second being how they would react to a second attack a week following. It doesn’t even need to be updated, they can just copy it from the 1979 DMG, and past it un-edited into the new ones. Modern DMGs need to include this information. Monsters and Organization, Six Examples: It’s been a lot of pages since I saw something this awesome. But ultimately, if I had a player who questioned my honesty so frequently that I needed to start using counter-measures to prove I wasn’t being unfair, then I would be fine telling them to leave my table. My general impression is that Gary liked to…’ stress’ his players more than I do, so perhaps that was a factor. At least not very forcefully, and certainly not so frequently that I’ve needed to develop counter-measures for it. In all my years as a GM, I don’t think I’ve ever actually had a player argue with me. I’m sure Gary found this useful, but it seems like strange advice to me. That way, when the players argue that the monsters seem overly-intuitive, the GM can show the note he or she made and prove the monsters decided on their actions before the players did. Monsters and Organization, Make a Note: Gary writes that before the players announce their course of action, the GM should write down what the monsters will do. You must be able to quickly determine what the monsters involved will do in any given situation, and this can be particularly difficult in combat situations.” This can be particularly difficult in combat situations. “As has been stressed herein, you will find that it is necessary to assume the various roles and personae of all creatures not represented by players. Monsters and Organization, Repetition: So, this is just kinda silly, but I thought this passage was odd:
#AD&D 1E DMG SERIES#
You can read all posts in this series under the Gary Gygax’s DMG tag.
My purpose is not to review the DMG, but to go through it as a modern gamer, learning about the roots of Dungeons and Dragons, and making note when I see something surprising or interesting, or something which could be adapted for a modern game. This post begins with the section “Monsters and Organization” on page 104, and continues through “Siege Engines and Devices of War Defensive Values” on page 110. This is the fourteenth installment of my continuing series on the 1979 Dungeon Master’s Guide, written by Gary Gygax.
0 kommentar(er)
