|
|
Post by captaincrumbcake on Jul 12, 2017 12:04:46 GMT -5
The date of this Forward is given as 1, November 1973.
Wait. What, exactly, is single game supposed to mean? Is it a session--from 1 to 5 at Jay's house, be there! A full battle reenactment? A dungeon level? Or... ?
Didn't the idea of a "single game" 1st manifest in print as the prototypical Palace of the Vampire Queen, in 1975? If so, how would anyone else have any idea what a single game meant? If not, when did this happen?
Are we to extract from this that the single game is a mechanic unto itself, laid one upon/after another, in order for the campaign to exist? Does this define what a campaign is? If not, what does?
Obviously, I am simply shining a light on something for everyone to look at--perhaps for the first time, perhaps again--so folks can then wonder for themselves.
Hopefully, gronan or Rob Kuntz or others more sage than I might drop in and clarify any misinterpretation I may have given.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2017 12:19:36 GMT -5
Dear God, stop torturing the English language.
A "single game" is one session. Nothing more, nothing less. A campaign is a series of related sessions.
The simplest, most straightforward answer is the right one 99 44/100 per cent of the time.
Also, as many many many many many many many many people have pointed out, D&D came out of the world of wargaming where these definitions were commonly known.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottanderson on Jul 12, 2017 12:31:25 GMT -5
That's a good question! I am not sure how to answer "what I say a campaign versus what is a one-shot?" Besides saying, You know it when you see it.
You can see the parts of the rules that facilitate a long-term story about the same world and possibly the same characters. They are the parts which tell us about turning scarce short-term resources like torches, turns and hit points into long-term resources like castles, alliances and experience levels. Especially experience levels.
For if these rules were meant for one-shot play, they would describe what each figure could at a few instants - 1st, 4th & 8th level maybe. But there are rules for a particular figure to transform to the next level of power and these different power levels are specifically called "experience levels." They are not static like hit dice, they require personal growth of the figure in question.
Historically, Dave and others were playing "Braunsteins" at some point in 1969 or 70 (someone check me on this) which were role-playing one shot adventures, as well as the first fantasy campaign by at least 1971. But both of these had antecedents in wargames.
|
|
|
|
Post by captaincrumbcake on Jul 12, 2017 12:36:56 GMT -5
One session is a single game. An idea I can get behind.
Based upon that, am I to assume that you would support the concept that one could have multiple sessions in a given day? And that, within each, a character could gain 1 level of experience per session? Which in theory, could result in a character gaining 7-8-9... levels in a day?
I'm just being silly, of course; or--an ass--by some folks' definition. I know.
I don't usually have lofty notions as to the purpose of my posts. I simply hope to contribute to the dialogue, in the hopes that new gamers (not those steeped in wargaming traditions and the time) can see an input of sage wisdom from the community; and from those that rightly qualify as such. I certainly yield to many members here the title honorific, yourself included.
Party on.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottanderson on Jul 12, 2017 12:55:04 GMT -5
Dear God, stop torturing the English language. You would make an excellent engineer and a mediocre lawyer. These are both compliments. |
|
|
|
Post by Crimhthan The Great on Jul 12, 2017 13:03:51 GMT -5
One session is a single game. An idea I can get behind. Based upon that, am I to assume that you would support the concept that one could have multiple sessions in a given day? And that, within each, a character could gain 1 level of experience per session? Which in theory, could result in a character gaining 7-8-9... levels in a day? I'm just being silly, of course; or--an ass--by some folks' definition. I know. I don't usually have lofty notions as to the purpose of my posts. I simply hope to contribute to the dialogue, in the hopes that new gamers (not those steeped in wargaming traditions and the time) can see an input of sage wisdom from the community; and from those that rightly qualify as such. I certainly yield to many members here the title honorific, yourself included. Party on. One group of players and a ref playing on a single day (or playing past midnight), even if interrupted by a full meal is one game session if it is the same characters in the same campaign. Different characters (different adventuring party) in the same or different campaigns is a new game session. You play 20 hours straight - one session and at most one level (if any) gained. If you figure about 200 hours of gaming for a fighter to go from 4th level to 5th level. "gaining 7,8,9 ... levels in a day?" No, not unless your name as a ref in enshrined in the Monty Haul/Munchkin Hall of Ultimate Shame. If so, send me a pm and I will give you a link to where you should be hanging out.  |
|
|
|
Post by Crimhthan The Great on Jul 12, 2017 13:06:51 GMT -5
That's a good question! I am not sure how to answer "what I say a campaign versus what is a one-shot?" Besides saying, You know it when you see it. You can see the parts of the rules that facilitate a long-term story about the same world and possibly the same characters. They are the parts which tell us about turning scarce short-term resources like torches, turns and hit points into long-term resources like castles, alliances and experience levels. Especially experience levels. For if these rules were meant for one-shot play, they would describe what each figure could at a few instants - 1st, 4th & 8th level maybe. But there are rules for a particular figure to transform to the next level of power and these different power levels are specifically called "experience levels." They are not static like hit dice, they require personal growth of the figure in question. Historically, Dave and others were playing "Braunsteins" at some point in 1969 or 70 (someone check me on this) which were role-playing one shot adventures, as well as the first fantasy campaign by at least 1971. But both of these had antecedents in wargames. A one-shot is simply a game session that is run with a set of characters one time and then set aside and is likely never returned to. Useful if you are running a game at a con or similar type of venue. Not much reason for it elsewhere IMO. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2017 14:19:56 GMT -5
One session is a single game. An idea I can get behind. Based upon that, am I to assume that you would support the concept that one could have multiple sessions in a given day? And that, within each, a character could gain 1 level of experience per session? Which in theory, could result in a character gaining 7-8-9... levels in a day? I'm just being silly, of course; or--an ass--by some folks' definition. I know. I don't usually have lofty notions as to the purpose of my posts. I simply hope to contribute to the dialogue, in the hopes that new gamers (not those steeped in wargaming traditions and the time) can see an input of sage wisdom from the community; and from those that rightly qualify as such. I certainly yield to many members here the title honorific, yourself included. Party on. Oh, okay. As long as your avowed purpose is "Let's stir some sh*t up and see what kind of discussion we get," I'm all for it; rock on. Sadly, some people DO sift through the words of the rules like a numerologist, trying to peel out deep hidden meanings where there just plain ain't none. A "game session" usually ended when we "got back to the inn to rest up." So, yeah, you could indeed have multiple sessions in a day. And back when I was young and foolish (instead old and foolish like I am now) we often did. I remember when Phil (M.A.R.) Barker was one of my enthusiastic players. We'd meet Saturday AM at his conference room on the edge of campus and play from about 10 AM to 7 or 8 PM, complete with a pizza break in the middle. And we often had three or four "sessions" per day. But you'd go up one level, TWO if you were very lucky. I figured, and figure, it should take approximately 6-10 sessions to go up one level. Good times, good times. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2017 14:21:14 GMT -5
Morgan's right about a "one shot". Something that you don't ever think will involve any of those players again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2017 14:24:18 GMT -5
Dear God, stop torturing the English language. You would make an excellent engineer and a mediocre lawyer. These are both compliments. Heh. 20+ years as a computer programmer. I would approach the law the same way my New Testament I professor taught me to approach Scripture: "First and foremost, what does the text SAY!" |
|
|
|
Post by Crimhthan The Great on Jul 12, 2017 14:46:12 GMT -5
I remember when Phil (M.A.R.) Barker was one of my enthusiastic players. We'd meet Saturday AM at his conference room on the edge of campus and play from about 10 AM to 7 or 8 PM, complete with a pizza break in the middle. And we often had three or four "sessions" per day. But you'd go up one level, TWO if you were very lucky. I figured, and figure, it should take approximately 6-10 sessions to go up one level. Good times, good times. Back when we were a bit younger we would play for about 10-12 hours at a stretch (not counting eating) and we considered that one game session. I always figured about 20 game sessions to go up a level. Now our game sessions run about 4-5 hours and I figure about 40 game sessions to go up a level and we play 2-3 times a week. We give XP only for Treasure and 10 GP equals 1 XP. |
|
|
|
Post by scottanderson on Jul 12, 2017 21:10:39 GMT -5
I must be getting old. I can only concentrate on a session for three, three and a half hours.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Jul 12, 2017 21:38:34 GMT -5
I must be getting old. I can only concentrate on a session for three, three and a half hours. In college which was over 40 years ago, we played 10-12-14 hours at a time and once played 24 hours straight (we had made arrangements for food, drink and an occasional 10 minute break when needed). Even now at 61 the only reason the games are not 8-10 hours long is only due to the available time and other peoples schedules. Things you could do in college are not usually possible on regular basis with people who work. The last couple of hours I was losing my voice, but I never ran out of ideas and kept going the whole time on the fly. Of course burning the candle at both ends for a long time may explain a lot now.  |
|
|
|
Post by scottanderson on Jul 13, 2017 0:26:48 GMT -5
When I was a young man, barely a teenager, we would play for many hours. Sometimes we would play a couple three different game systems in a sitting because we liked a few different ones. I don't think we ever played longer than ten hours though. Usually more like 3-6. It seems that my experience is an outlier.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Jul 13, 2017 13:44:59 GMT -5
When I was a young man, barely a teenager, we would play for many hours. Sometimes we would play a couple three different game systems in a sitting because we liked a few different ones. I don't think we ever played longer than ten hours though. Usually more like 3-6. It seems that my experience is an outlier. I would guess it is more a generational thing. |
|
|
|
Post by captaincrumbcake on Jul 13, 2017 18:17:10 GMT -5
Hoping we can refocus on the subject. Let's start here.
So then. Let's expand upon these points.
Suppose Fighting Man Sir Duncil is in party A, and they enjoy a nice session for a few hours in the morning; enough that he could advance 1 level. Two or three of the chaps in his group leave, and three others arrive after lunch and Group B puts forth an expedition that lasts until 6 pm; enough for all of them to gain a level. Is Sir Duncil restricted from gaining the 2nd level because its in the same day? And what if the group again breaks up, with party C arriving at 7 pm and playing until midnight. Within party C remains Sir Duncil and two others from party B. And as it so happens, yadda yadda. And group C earns enough to gain a level for its members.
It is possible that all the characters described above actually took part of the same adventure; just entering and leaving at different points within it. Or, it could be that each "session" was a separate adventure/game. Does that really matter as far as experience earned by the characters? What does everyone think?
I have no issue with someone deciding that characters from party A & B should gain no more than the 1 level gained leading up to the playing of party C. Just as I can support the game referee that decides to award experience enough to gain more than one level by anyone, as described, for playing in 1, 2 or all 3 sessions.
So, what I am seeing in this conundrum, is the point that, some things described in the original manuals are very clear cut and precise, while other things are worded (as this subject with things like "single game" and "session" etc.) that can only be resolved by interpretation. Or, a definitive proclamation by someone that knows, with certainly beyond certainty, what the heck is actually meant by the language. *
As I always hope to imply in my posting, I am simply exposing portions of the games rulings in order for others to examine and offer their input. I wouldn't call this stirring up sh*t. Its as valid a reason for posting as anyone else's.
I hope this helps re-rail the subject.
* Certainly anyone that sat at the table with D. Arneson or G. Gygax and witnessed/experienced playing wherein the subject became defined and established (for all); as opposed to the idea that it was just their HR.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2017 23:27:06 GMT -5
Notice "get back to the inn and rest up" part. Sir Duncil's expedition might be in the same day for the PLAYER, but the CHARACTER spends a week between adventures.
Volume 3, Page 36
"Dungeon expedition 1 week
Wilderness adventure = 1 move = 1 day
1 Week of actual time = 1 week of game time
The time for dungeon adventures considers only preparations and a typical, one
day descent into the pits."
That seems really clear to me; one day of dungeon adventure, six days of preparation. Then rest and healing afterwards.
Volume 1 Page 18:
"It is also recommended
that no more experience points be awarded for any single adventure than will suffice
to move the character upwards one level."
Not SESSION. ANY SINGLE ADVENTURE.
Again, I see no ambiguity here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2017 23:28:29 GMT -5
Also, what the heck is going on that the party is leveling up in a single adventure? Only EXTRAORDINARY good fortune should make that even remotely possible; leveling up every 4-6 adventures was considered VERY fast.
|
|
|
|
Post by captaincrumbcake on Jul 14, 2017 0:55:58 GMT -5
Me neither. The original subject was dealing with the idea of the single game to be found within a campaign. Gary mentions it as being possible, yet he distinctly states that the rules within are intended for the campaign. So, I simply brought up the issue of, what constitutes a single game?
"While it is possible to play a single game, unrelated to any other game events past or future, it is the campaign for which these rules are designed." Men&Magic, p.3
Which, when considering the single game, should naturally make a good game ref decide what that actually constitutes, since XP and leveling are dependent upon it.
Then would you say that, according to your own comment, Sir Duncil would be eligible for all 3 experience levels earned since one could easily divide each portion of playing I described, into a single separate game each? Or would you consider the whole day 1 adventure?
There are examples where Mr. Gygax specifically states within his own adventures, that it is okay for the characters to retreat to their hidey cave (safe zone), where earned experience can then be dispersed among the characters. So is doing this, multiple times within a single adventure, merely his own HR?
Therein lies the confusion that many (of us) experience upon occasion when reading the manuals.
And why posting such material and shining light on it, in the hopes of drawing sage and sought advice from those of the original campaigns, seems warranted.
I hope that all these pointless postings eventually bear productive fruit that all the members can use.
And I would like to think that those of us doing this are not doing so just to irritate anyone to whom this all seems so obvious.
If anyone feels such from anything I've posted, please accept my apologies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 1:32:49 GMT -5
I already answered the question. Stop working so hard to twist the meaning of perfectly ordinary English. You do it consistently, trying to invent "ambiguity" and "controversy" where there is absolutely none.
It has gone from being merely silly to outright bathetic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Jul 14, 2017 10:33:46 GMT -5
1 Week of actual time = 1 week of game time. I must confess I never really understood this part. In a game of 12 hours we might play through 2 days or we might play through several months of game time. Now in between games, time ran one for one but during the game that was never the case. Not SESSION. ANY SINGLE ADVENTURE. I always used this as One Game Session is identically equal to A Single Adventure. That never seemed to be a problem INC. |
|
|
|
Post by captaincrumbcake on Jul 14, 2017 12:48:56 GMT -5
I already answered the question. Stop working so hard to twist the meaning of perfectly ordinary English. You do it consistently, trying to invent "ambiguity" and "controversy" where there is absolutely none. It has gone from being merely silly to outright bathetic. Fine, Mr. Mornard. I'll twist no more. Don't want to appear any more silly or bathetic than I apparently am. Game: gronanofsimmerya! |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Jul 14, 2017 15:19:54 GMT -5
I already answered the question. Stop working so hard to twist the meaning of perfectly ordinary English. You do it consistently, trying to invent "ambiguity" and "controversy" where there is absolutely none. It has gone from being merely silly to outright bathetic. Fine, Mr. Mornard. I'll twist no more. Don't want to appear any more silly or bathetic than I apparently am. Game: gronanofsimmerya! Silly sometimes, aren't we all, now "bathetic" is that an gronanism? possibly related in some strange ways to spoonerisms? Whatever that is I don't think it applies to you. I think your original questions was answered by Crimhthan The Great when he talked about a "one shot". That would be the alternative to the campaign. As was stated elsewhere IIRC Gygax and Arneson had different views on experience and treasure and how much was given out and how it was counted. So a lot has been posted here, take what you want tweak if needed till it is right for you and that is all that matters. You require no ones approval to do it your way. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2017 21:25:32 GMT -5
"Bathetic" is a real word. Look it up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Aug 9, 2017 14:01:08 GMT -5
"Bathetic" is a real word. Look it up.  That is priceless, was not familiar with that word. I just assumed that you typed b when you meant to type p. I did not guess that it was a real word. You got me!  |
|
That is priceless, was not familiar with that word. I just assumed that you typed b when you meant to type p. I did not guess that it was a real word. You got me! 