|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 17, 2015 18:28:29 GMT -5
Well, I can never leave well enough alone. waysoftheearth has his own excellent version of a document like the following. And, of course, there is Matt Finch's excellent Primer. Here is mine. Y'all please do let me know what you think! How to Enjoy Playing Dungeons and Dragons “Old School” Using the Original Edition of the Rules
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 17, 2015 18:29:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 17, 2015 18:32:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 17, 2015 18:33:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 17, 2015 18:39:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by randyb on Apr 17, 2015 18:39:54 GMT -5
Different players enjoy different parts. Don't let one part lose one or more players who don't enjoy that part as much. Keep the mix moving.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 17, 2015 18:40:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 17, 2015 18:42:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 17, 2015 18:45:29 GMT -5
I'm not sure of all my sources. If you recognize something you've said or someone else has said, let me know and I will thank them on this thread.
If you would like this as a document PM me and I will send you a copy.
Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Necromancer on Apr 18, 2015 14:48:41 GMT -5
Great stuff, tetramorph - thanks for sharing! Perhaps a little lengthy for someone that has never played RPG's at all before, but otherwise very insightful and informative about what makes the earliest editions of D&D special, how to understand its principles and how to get the most out of it. Well put, have an Exalt!
And I wouldn't mind a copy of that document, if you don't mind! Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Apr 20, 2015 9:33:32 GMT -5
"Introduce" them like Gary, myself and others were introduced: by playing. I'm not being purposefully difficult; but what we learned from Arneson in 1972 was then promoted via play and goes on to this day. Get people imagining and doing rather than the DM fact-checking in scientific reduction mode. Immersion, action, imagination, difference, transformation. There are no prescribed routes for these points, which I consider paramount, other than through play.
|
|
|
Post by The Red Baron on Apr 20, 2015 12:07:45 GMT -5
These type of guides can be useful for new DMs, but new players will have a lot more fun just getting their hands dirty and figuring it all out for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 22, 2015 16:51:37 GMT -5
Great stuff, tetramorph - thanks for sharing! Perhaps a little lengthy for someone that has never played RPG's at all before, but otherwise very insightful and informative about what makes the earliest editions of D&D special, how to understand its principles and how to get the most out of it. Well put, have an Exalt!
And I wouldn't mind a copy of that document, if you don't mind! Thanks! Necromancer, I am in the process of a significant edit. Once I have edited, I will share the new edited document with you. Thanks for asking!
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 22, 2015 16:53:25 GMT -5
robkuntz, and The Red Baron, I read you and I affirm you. I still think there is a place for the kind of document I have just shared. I know that I have (in the form of Matt Finch's Primer) and would have (in the sense that I would rather have had a less polemical one, as I have tried to provide, above) benefitted from such a document before my very first session. I am bookish. I like reading up on something before I get into it. That said, nothing beats experience. That said, I still like intros!
|
|
|
Post by hengest on Sept 21, 2015 20:02:43 GMT -5
I have asked about this on one other forum, but I would like to try again here.
How might you introduce an RPG to someone who:
-currently lives in the US and is familiar with Anglo-American pop culture, but lived through adolescence in a culture quite different, with no mention of RPGs -didn't know until the other day who Luke Skywalker's father is -doesn't know what an elf or dwarf is -has never read Tolkien or any fiction that would be considered fantasy -has never seen any movies that would be considered fantasy -has no interest in warfare
This is a real person with whom I live. I have talked just a bit about the basic ideas in RPGs and she was curious, not dismissive or enthusiastic. In fact, she requested to play -- in the dark, with no preparation by anyone. She wished to be DM, having heard a one-sentence explanation of that job. I agreed, made up a character and a setting in 30 seconds, and was met with questions like "what do I do?" -- which showed that my explanations had more or less totally failed.
I'd like to start a game someday, and it would be cool if she could be part of it. I fear that immersion would just seem like chaos, so some basic exercises in the meantime seem like a good idea. But I've never attempted this before, and would like input if anyone has any.
I'm thinking, on separate occassions, that I could try the following:
-tell her what humans are, tell her what elves are (long-lived humanoids culturally distinct from humans who are associated with woods and the long slow life of the natural world), tell her what dwarves are (somewhat long-lived humanoids who are associated with earth and stone and the productive stomach of the world) -ask her to imagine a low-tech town of roughly medieval technology and tell me about it. What are the basic concerns? -tell her about magic and ask her to think about that village if certain such abilities were held by a few people
This seems like a start. But what else would you try?
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Sept 22, 2015 15:15:15 GMT -5
hengest, what you're describing is so confusing to me that I could either write a book or keep it simple. As I believe I do not have a full picture of the actual situation I will go for simple: I don't really believe you can ref until you have played. We learn by imitation and we need to watch a ref to learn to ref, IMHO. I cannot imagine attempting to play a game based upon the classical western legendaria with no knowledge of it. Read her the LOTRs. If this is a romantic relationship, reading to one another is a lovely date. If not reading, then watch the Peter Jackson movies. If she isn't squeamish or picky then, to get the sword and sorcery aspect of it she needs to see Beastmaster and the Schwarzeneger Conan the Barbarian movie, respectively. A a couple of episodes of Land of the Lost and maybe the scifi classic movie Forbidden Planet to get the "lost world" and gonzo 0e connections, respectively. Then she needs to play as a player, I would say, at least three times before she attempts to ref. She needs to see a ref: a.) have some carefully prepared notes for a dungeon with a map and a key, but who nevertheless b.) clearly can make things up on the fly and respond to players in a creative way and who, over the course of these three sessions (at least) engages in at least the following core mechanics: c.) 1. attack and damage rolls 2. initiative and surprise 3. Saving throws 4. NPC reaction rolls and their clever interpretation 5. clerical turning of undead 6. exploration mechanics such as: find secret door, trigger trap, listen (at door), doors auto-close unless spiked, etc. That is my wild attempt to make sense of your situation! Hope that can help.
|
|
|
Post by hengest on Sept 22, 2015 15:42:07 GMT -5
Thanks for the response, tetramorph. By "Start a game", I meant "get a group together", not ref. I would be unsuited to DMing anything, ever, even if I gamed constantly for ten years. Oh, dear. I see I made it sound like I wanted her someday to ref. No, no, no. This was a "sitting there" moment where she seemed open to the basic idea, understood that it was a shared world created in the mind, and then requested that role. I went along with it, thinking "okay, I'll be the 'player' and say a few things, and she'll reply for the 'world'." That's all. That was not the idea at all, but I see that my post was a lot less clear than I intended. I would never ref, she would need a few years of exposure to the legendaria before even playing. But you still gave a reasonable response. Thanks! Introducing her to LOTR is a frequent thought of mine, regardless of RPGs. But that's another story.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Sept 22, 2015 21:16:53 GMT -5
Read her the LOTRs. If this is a romantic relationship, reading to one another is a lovely date. If not reading, then watch the Peter Jackson movies. I'd recommend starting with a shorter tale: Three Hearts and Three Lions might be close to "ideal"? If you don't want to read aloud yourself, there are some fantastic audio books about these days. Highly recommended, and far far preferable to most cinema adaptions IMHO. If Three Hearts is (or is not?) enjoyed, you might consider moving to The Hobbit? If that is well recieved then you might progress to LotR with more hope of success? The audio books (narrated by Ian Holm) are an absolute masterpiece. It would, IMHO, be a tragedy to expose anyone to the PJ movies before the books. So shoot me.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Sept 22, 2015 22:21:13 GMT -5
waysoftheearthI've looked all over for 3 hearts/lions. Why the heck is that book so hard to find?
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Sept 23, 2015 5:42:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hengest on Sept 23, 2015 9:43:41 GMT -5
waysoftheearth, tetramorph: I am not particularly into the PJ movies, and am fairly certain she would not enjoy them -- certainly my dislike wouldn't aid her in getting into them. Maybe I'll check out Three Hearts and Three Lions, which I haven't read. Thanks very much for the solid ideas, everyone. Maybe I should start with "Many Moons" by James Thurber first...
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Sept 23, 2015 13:25:36 GMT -5
Of course I prefer the books to the movies. But I find them acceptable and enjoyable. The Ians are great and the music is fitting, especially, for me. waysoftheearth, your link is appreciated but it says the book is currently unavailable. Any other hope?
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Sept 23, 2015 16:54:57 GMT -5
waysoftheearth, your link is appreciated but it says the book is currently unavailable. Any other hope? Amazon is showing 21 hardcover and 10 softcover copies in the "used" categories in conditions ranging from "good" to "like new"... take your pick. Also, I can't imagine why the ebook would ever be unavailable.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Sept 23, 2015 17:22:36 GMT -5
ebook is not. But I can order the paper or hard back. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 29, 2015 16:18:29 GMT -5
"Introduce" them like Gary, myself and others were introduced: by playing. I'm not being purposefully difficult; but what we learned from Arneson in 1972 was then promoted via play and goes on to this day. Get people imagining and doing rather than the DM fact-checking in scientific reduction mode. Immersion, action, imagination, difference, transformation. There are no prescribed routes for these points, which I consider paramount, other than through play. I really agree with this, it is the very best way. But what is someone to do if they find themselves in possession of a copy of OD&D and want to play the game and have no one they know who has played OD&D the way robkuntz is talking about? This goes along with the question by hengest: I have asked about this on one other forum, but I would like to try again here. How might you introduce an RPG to someone who: ... .... Snip ... ... This seems like a start. But what else would you try? Here is my suggestion: 1. Read LotR and the Hobbit 2. Read the Conan story Red Nails by Robert E Howard and other Howard stories 3. Read the John Carter of Mars books by Edgar Rice Burroughs 4. Explore other Appendix N books and authors 5. Hang out here, read the threads, play in one or more pbp games, ask questions 6. Invite your friend(s) that are interested to do the same thing. Listen to robkuntz, check out the links to his blogs, he was there at the beginning and you can not go wrong reading his stuff as inspiration. Just remember it is not about imitation, it is about making it your own. Read how all of us collectively go about making it our own and then do your own thing. Always remember you can try things and if they are not fun then try different things. Give your imagination free rein. In my game I often have portals that lead other places, sometimes they are two way and sometimes one way. My players fairly frequently go through those portals because it is fun to find out what is on the other side. Read, listen and learn to create things on the fly, try to right down ideas when they occur. I also believe that you can learn it from scratch even without someone to introduce you to it, although if you have someone to introduce you that is much the preferred route. We have a number of threads from multiple people here that will point you in good directions - just work on creating your own stuff by borrowing from everywhere and tweaking it to your way.
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Sept 29, 2015 16:53:26 GMT -5
"Introduce" them like Gary, myself and others were introduced: by playing. I'm not being purposefully difficult; but what we learned from Arneson in 1972 was then promoted via play and goes on to this day. Get people imagining and doing rather than the DM fact-checking in scientific reduction mode. Immersion, action, imagination, difference, transformation. There are no prescribed routes for these points, which I consider paramount, other than through play. I really agree with this, it is the very best way. But what is someone to do if they find themselves in possession of a copy of OD&D and want to play the game and have no one they know who has played OD&D the way robkuntz is talking about? This goes along with the question by hengest: How did Arneson do it? Who taught Arneson, the very first teacher/"learner" himself? How did we do it but as a small example of what Arneson portrayed to us in 1972? You seem to be suggesting your question as a negative, whereas proliferated example after example points to the opposite, that difference is not wrong (nor is anyone who claims or shows ignorance, unless it's willful); that it is not "HOW TO" and thus, if failing "How TO," then this line of thought leads to "Right" or 'Wrong" courses or conclusions. For Arneson's group indeed engaged with their RPG in different ways than ours, and so did others then, and this is what it was meant to be, THIS D&D creative phenomenon that we type as a general "game". All of this straying is good, for it resounds with those who stray and also forms paths to difference, change and creative expansion and learning associated with that. D&D is a transformational vehicle. And if it was not such on every level, this site and others like it would not now exist. I have never believed in its premise, due to the constraints otherwise attendant with "received knowledge," in any other way. People will imitate at first, but if left to their own wiles they will mature and find their own voices and positions, hopefully extremely different from others!! As Einstein said, "I do not teach my students. I provide an atmosphere in which they can learn." There is way too much received knowledge in this game, even among those who are of the OSR ilk; and, IMO, it is strangling the leaps of creativity at the heart of the gamer, whether fresh off the boat or a seasoned veteran. So. Jump in the water and joyously claim your decision to learn to swim; and if someone says you are astray and have not yet found your way and worries for you, just remember that Arneson, Gygax and Kuntz were RPG "swimmers," and so are you.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Sept 29, 2015 22:04:48 GMT -5
I really agree with this, it is the very best way. But what is someone to do if they find themselves in possession of a copy of OD&D and want to play the game and have no one they know who has played OD&D the way robkuntz is talking about? This goes along with the question by hengest: How did Arneson do it? Who taught Arneson, the very first teacher/"learner" himself? How did we do it but as a small example of what Arneson portrayed to us in 1972? You seem to be suggesting your question as a negative, whereas proliferated example after example points to the opposite, that difference is not wrong (nor is anyone who claims or shows ignorance, unless it's willful); that it is not "HOW TO" and thus, if failing "How TO," then this line of thought leads to "Right" or 'Wrong" courses or conclusions. For Arneson's group indeed engaged with their RPG in different ways than ours, and so did others then, and this is what it was meant to be, THIS D&D creative phenomenon that we type as a general "game". All of this straying is good, for it resounds with those who stray and also forms paths to difference, change and creative expansion and learning associated with that. D&D is a transformational vehicle. And if it was not such on every level, this site and others like it would not now exist. I have never believed in its premise, due to the constraints otherwise attendant with "received knowledge," in any other way. People will imitate at first, but if left to their own wiles they will mature and find their own voices and positions, hopefully extremely different from others!! As Einstein said, "I do not teach my students. I provide an atmosphere in which they can learn." There is way too much received knowledge in this game, even among those who are of the OSR ilk; and, IMO, it is strangling the leaps of creativity at the heart of the gamer, whether fresh off the boat or a seasoned veteran. So. Jump in the water and joyously claim your decision to learn to swim; and if someone says you are astray and have not yet found your way and worries for you, just remember that Arneson, Gygax and Kuntz were RPG "swimmers," and so are you. I think you are misunderstanding me my friend. What I was trying to say without "edition warring" is suppose someone comes to OD&D with all kinds of habits and limits on their imagination from their exposure to the modern big business model where everything is defined with hundreds of pages of rules for everything - you know the kind of writing that you don't do - and they want to play OD&D without any "pre-learned" hindrances. I was just suggesting that if they do not have anyone to learn from by playing in a campaign, such as yours for instance, that they might expose themselves to some of the source literature - I believe Gygax did that for you by giving you some suggested reading bitd, and then checking out some of the most basic start playing advice - not to constrain them but to just get started and always with an eye to determining their own road and their own way. Perhaps I lack the ability to explain clearly what I mean. I am not trying to define a right or wrong way to play. I was trying to say that if all you know is the corporate feed way to play, how do you break out of that and go back to what Arneson did. To me if you have an Arneson type of ref who knows how to take the game 100 or 1000 different ways you play and learn and then you leave and go do you own thing. However, if all you have is OD&D and nothing else - no background in the literature or anything else - only the books and perhaps you have played the current corporate game - how do you find your way to an Arneson type of game - not imitation - but something unique and free of constraints. I know how my group bitd got there but we had already read a lot of the Appendix N books and authors, as well as played some of the other games that both Arneson and Gygax had played. I was attempting to answer the question of how to start if you lack all of the background. I agree with this "People will imitate at first, but if left to their own wiles they will mature and find their own voices and positions, hopefully extremely different from others!!" wholeheartedly. But what do they do if they have nothing to even imitate - where do they start. That is what I was trying to address - you have to start someplace on the way to maturity.
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Sept 29, 2015 22:43:57 GMT -5
How did Arneson do it? Who taught Arneson, the very first teacher/"learner" himself? How did we do it but as a small example of what Arneson portrayed to us in 1972? You seem to be suggesting your question as a negative, whereas proliferated example after example points to the opposite, that difference is not wrong (nor is anyone who claims or shows ignorance, unless it's willful); that it is not "HOW TO" and thus, if failing "How TO," then this line of thought leads to "Right" or 'Wrong" courses or conclusions. For Arneson's group indeed engaged with their RPG in different ways than ours, and so did others then, and this is what it was meant to be, THIS D&D creative phenomenon that we type as a general "game". All of this straying is good, for it resounds with those who stray and also forms paths to difference, change and creative expansion and learning associated with that. D&D is a transformational vehicle. And if it was not such on every level, this site and others like it would not now exist. I have never believed in its premise, due to the constraints otherwise attendant with "received knowledge," in any other way. People will imitate at first, but if left to their own wiles they will mature and find their own voices and positions, hopefully extremely different from others!! As Einstein said, "I do not teach my students. I provide an atmosphere in which they can learn." There is way too much received knowledge in this game, even among those who are of the OSR ilk; and, IMO, it is strangling the leaps of creativity at the heart of the gamer, whether fresh off the boat or a seasoned veteran. So. Jump in the water and joyously claim your decision to learn to swim; and if someone says you are astray and have not yet found your way and worries for you, just remember that Arneson, Gygax and Kuntz were RPG "swimmers," and so are you. I think you are misunderstanding me my friend. What I was trying to say without "edition warring" is suppose someone comes to OD&D with all kinds of habits and limits on their imagination from their exposure to the modern big business model where everything is defined with hundreds of pages of rules for everything - you know the kind of writing that you don't do - and they want to play OD&D without any "pre-learned" hindrances. I was just suggesting that if they do not have anyone to learn from by playing in a campaign, such as yours for instance, that they might expose themselves to some of the source literature - I believe Gygax did that for you by giving you some suggested reading bitd, and then checking out some of the most basic start playing advice - not to constrain them but to just get started and always with an eye to determining their own road and their own way. Perhaps I lack the ability to explain clearly what I mean. I am not trying to define a right or wrong way to play. I was trying to say that if all you know is the corporate feed way to play, how do you break out of that and go back to what Arneson did. To me if you have an Arneson type of ref who knows how to take the game 100 or 1000 different ways you play and learn and then you leave and go do you own thing. However, if all you have is OD&D and nothing else - no background in the literature or anything else - only the books and perhaps you have played the current corporate game - how do you find your way to an Arneson type of game - not imitation - but something unique and free of constraints. I know how my group bitd got there but we had already read a lot of the Appendix N books and authors, as well as played some of the other games that both Arneson and Gygax had played. I was attempting to answer the question of how to start if you lack all of the background. I agree with this "People will imitate at first, but if left to their own wiles they will mature and find their own voices and positions, hopefully extremely different from others!!" wholeheartedly. But what do they do if they have nothing to even imitate - where do they start. That is what I was trying to address - you have to start someplace on the way to maturity. Yes. Much of what we are comparing and discussing enters the equation at some point, and in many nuanced ways. But there is simply no simple answer to your question unless the person is in fact wanting to exercise their imagination. Humans all have that. Their DNA is set up for growth (change) and not the opposite (static recycling of very limited degrees and kinds of thought/action). The corporate model is not about change but the mechanistic repetition of closed cycles--dispose and repeat. I would presume that if the player is looking to experience something other than that (which IMO is limited to immediate self-gratification in many cases, an internalization of very limited external sensations) that they have to be weaned onto a more natural view of internal quality. That is already imbedded in the OD&D open approach, so even the most mediocre of DMs could example such a change, which is a polar shift, IMO. Other than that, reading a book on Tolkien will not accomplish that as a way to OD&D. It might very well reinforce the image of external want of being the hero who defeats Smaug but through the invariant system mechanic, and not through abstract planning and approach indicative of harnessing and using a human's natural problem solving skills. Thus I have always suggested that Appendix N is for those who have harnessed a good idea of what their philosophy is; and these "books" of Fantasy act thereafter as inspirational matter to sculpt the former, to provide different takes upon the philosophy in concert with the imaginative routes they are taking together. Thus reading outside fantasy is what builds upon the imaginative expansion of ideas in juxtaposition, and all of that inspires conceptual leaps as we define categories which either interrelate or not, or in fact form new relations. Fantasy stories do not accomplish such broad sweeps in thought; and the latter is what is needed for people who have had no exposure to other than a single-sided marketed philosophy that has become a pattern in them due to repetition and social reinforcement. IOW, the market depends on these types of consumers and breeds them in such ways to sustain a narrowly defined feedback. That's what the market is. And they produce "mind(s) of metal" as Treebeard said... Final verdict: engage the imagination with these types: What do you want to do? Lead by example. When you ask that question and they look forlornly for the book that is no longer there to guide their prescribed/pre-set reactions, set the example. But don't be disappointed that they cannot act rather than react. Much of the present generation experiences life in front of a computer screen, and not outside in the world where the actual curiosity and imagination are engaged to their fullest. Read more: ruinsofmurkhill.proboards.com/thread/252/guide-introduce-folks-0e?page=2#ixzz3nBqSTtZ1
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Sept 30, 2015 6:07:40 GMT -5
Admin Pete, I get what you are saying and I agree with you that in the hypothetical case you are presenting that reading the classic literature, prior to the D&D self-feedback loop began, would've one of the best things they could do.
|
|
|
Post by hengest on Oct 1, 2015 13:27:30 GMT -5
What I'm doing right now is reading lots of threads about new players and children and seeing what other people have been through. It's interesting and inspiring, to say the least.
I did read her Many Moons the other night. It went pretty well. I'm going to go from there to some Western European folktales, then maybe some modern girl-centric fantasy (if anyone cares -- I don't believe that women need novels with female protagonists, but since the genre is totally new and she likes a central character to identify with, I'm thinking along these lines). Am trying Robin McKinley for myself first, then maybe will push something on her. The suggestions above are all fantastic and I'm saving them, but we're not there yet.
Thanks for all the tips and suggestions, everyone (and for the earlier stuff on this thread).
|
|