Great to hear about this again! Are you planing to continue your AD&D DMG reading videos? I enjoyed them.

Something like that was possible though back in the day when the game was new, there was a severe limit of DM"s and a lot of players who wanted to play. Its gotten now where there are a bit more DM's than there was in the mid 70's. A good video to watch on the history of gaming in the mid 70's is Matthew Colville's channel and look up: interview a DM: Jim Murphy.

If you ever wondered why Wizard players would try to put their towers in strange places like Limbo. This was also why. Don't want a rival group helping themselves to your stash of magic weapons.

@@Leivve And the Leomun'ds Secret Chest spell makes sense now

So many tables have a "generally no pvp" rule that it would never come up. Interesting that GG assumed always on PvP!

@@SymbioteMullet This is a little different though because it can be done without killing someone's cherished PC. Think how cool it would be to storm someone's castle while they are away! And think how cool it would be to design your own in order to prevent the same kind of thing. Also: this gives a meaningful purpose to all that gold that characters acquire. It not only has a use but the treasure itself is now a source of story arcs. Even "useless" things things like works of art found on treasure tables are now important. Imagine coming home and finding your place ransacked and then on top of that you're like "And those a**holes stole my favorite painting, too!?!" 😄

@@4saken404 the players make dungeons and are the dragons (with horde!)

Its obvious because you understand the roots of 1E. Like you I started in the early 80s, 83 I think. I read everything I could about it and the roots of D&D were fascinating to young me. Every table was a different planet with similar mechanics.

It's because we're old. Watching younger players and DMs figure this stuff out is fun...

@@Marshcreekmini true. I wonder if they've figured out that 5th edition means there are 4 very others? If I had to be stuck with one it would be second. But I would still like to sprinkle a bit of 1st into it. Everything afterward seems like Wizards were trying to capture some aspect of a computer game. Or card game in the case of 3rd edition.

I don't think it's "lost", besides the players fighting each other, pretty much everything he says is what happens in the official wotc adventures league (which is the complete opposite to the "osr philosophy"). For everyday played you get a week off, you probably play with a different table each week, you can create a new character whenever you want...It's just something that comes with playing with a lot of people

@Nat Smythe I didn't play 4th because I already had a WoW account. Likewise I never played 3rd because I already played Magic The Gathering. As I read that players handbook everything I was reading in the spell section began to read like MtG cards. It was bizarre on my part until I had heard that Wizzards were trying to develop an RPG about the same time they bought TSR.

We did some really similar stuff back in high school too, except we played in a conference room attached to the library.

Wish rpgs were that popular in my country growing up, man 30 people? we barely managed to put together 4 dudes and a gm to play Vampire revised.

This sounds ideal.

They discovered the ultimate magic item dupe glitch

Haha, no, that's just straight up savegame editing.

In Central Florida, in the mid 80s, I had the opportunity to play in the "Cess Pool", a genre and system spanning campaign that encompassed LOTR, Dr. Who. and Monty Python (Michael Ellis was a rogue Timelord). It was run by a guy who owned a used book store. Huge number of players. Almost always somebody playing 24/7.

@@vincejester7558 Yes, exactly the sort of thing you'd see in old school games. I recall someone that ended up with a small fleet of Battlestars.

@@jonathanreece4151 I had a paranoid space marine. I didn't get to play often, but my plan to seed planets with Stasis locked shock troops with Bolo tanks actually became a major turning point in the campaign. I heard from some of the players that an entire galactic invasion was headed off this way. So many players and so much actual lived lore really made playing in or hearing about that campaign something special.

How exactly did Dragonlance cause such a sweeping change in how people played?

@@priestesslucy3299 i would imagine just like lotr, except dragonlance was tied to dnd. Dragonlance was probably extremly popular and when players saw that the characters are in kind-of-dnd they went "Can we do that?? Can we please do that??". Or mabey it was like CR. People saw them and then looked for dnd to do exactly that.

This could be awesome!

Oh, 100%. A subset of this style of play is the "West Marches" campaign (look up the original blog posts, it's actually missing some of this information but very similar principles) where the world is uncharted and players actually need to map out the world, and something they discovered was that parties were running around essentially *competing* to figure out where the really good stuff was before anyone else found it, and after sessions people would start chatting online like "dude, there's some crazy stuff up in the mountains" or outright lie about what was at a location to throw other parties off of a trail. Wild stuff.

I just love the idea of getting some sweet loot and leaving a message or a trap for the next party to razz them about it, i'd be giggling about it for weeks

This would be so awesome

I feel like it would also light a fire under those players who otherwise just don't feel like getting off the couch on game night and flake out at the last minute. Hey, that's fine, but we're leaving Rando the Murder Hobo in the storage room and if he starves before the next session, that's on you, guy.

@@BrentARJ Rando the Murder Hobo is a well-known PC.

That's an interesting evolution of play dynamics xD

Open Table?

@@priestesslucy3299 I think an open table is like anyone can just walk in and play in any of the sessions, without having any pressure to show up next session

@@priestesslucy3299 he describes it in video!

Also it seems like the older I get the more important scheduling becomes as a priority. 😅

@@4saken404 100%, my kids have a more active social life than I do!

I was gonna make the same comment. West Marches campaigns are basically just this, though I haven't seen many that use the "game time is real time" rule he mentioned, which I think it pretty neat.

The advantage of gm-ing for antivaxxers lol

@@googleuser9009 My brother lives with us, and he has scaring in his lungs from a chlorine gas bomb his base got hit with in Iraq. So we have been seriously cautious about Covid from the beginning.

I started D&D in the early to mid 90's and was not exposed to OSR D&D (yeah, I do not consider 2e OSR) until much, much later. As a result I never fully experienced pre-Hickman D&D. I always felt there was something missing, off, or otherwise not quite clicking about the D&D games we played. Nearly all of the people in our RP group felt the same way. Whenever we placed too much emphasis on DM-led story nobody enjoyed the game. Games were much more fun whenever the DM simply provided world as backdrop and the player characters interacted with the backdrop. Nobody really knew what the story was nor were it was heading and that included the DM. The best DMs I played under either completely invented the world piecemeal as we played or pre-created their world in so much detail they could handle any situation that occurred naturally. For our group, the Hickman Revolution actively hurt how we wanted to play. The result was we eventually stopped playing. I'm not saying fantasy literature or other story mediums were not used as inspiration for our games. We played games inspired by The Lord of the Rings, The Chronicles of Narnia, Star Wars, Lovecraft, as well as Forgotten Realms and Ravenloft. We just very rarely used adventure modules as they constrained us much more than a DM with a solid understanding of their world and the ability to improvise and world build in real time. Sadly, I never acquired that gift so all the games where I was DM were very lack luster. In any case, perhaps a large portion of the possible gaming market demands Hickman-style story-based adventuring but I'd imagine they just have never played with a really talented DM yet. In my case, Hickman-style story-based adventuring didn't help me become a better DM.

@@0ptikGhost I started playing in the 70s and something always felt off until I started making massive changes to the system on my own, and more importantly, massive changes to the assumptions about what the game was about and what the PCs would actually be doing. D&D never made any sense to me as it was originally played, because I can't imagine how people have any fun playing that when there are such better alternatives. In any case, I agree with most of what you said in terms of my personal gaming except for the implicit assumption that "DM led stories" is what I'm talking about. Binary thinking is tough, I guess, but there are actually more than two playstyle options available, believe it or not. But what I'm talking about is the HUGE, HUGE, HUGE popularity of adventures and even adventure paths/campaign which suggests that that's what customers actually want from the game. Not sure why pointing out that you don't personally want that has any bearing on that observation. Solipsism can affect anyone, I suppose

I'd argue that this conflict would have never arisen had people actually paid attention to what Hickman was saying though. His "revolution" advocated for far more nuanced and minor changes to gameplay than what we eventually saw. I have always found it funny that in his manifesto he specified plots taking one to two sessions to resolve. Not 20+ over a year, just one or two. In his original vision, the plot and storytelling elements were never suppose to be too grand in scale, but kind of a quest by quest sort of ordeal. Started implementing this smaller scale story telling in my campaigns, and my players response has been positive. I give them bit sized stories they can invest in in the short run, and get to build on their actions to fuel others or to expand on the ones that resonant. Makes the game feel more responsive to their agency, without it feeling overwhelming to DM. Plus, bigger plots can get woven into the background without dominating most sessions.

There's players and fries for each playstyle. I had a lot of fun running games which were a series of quests and events that built upon each other as you describe (but definitely longer than two sessions, some subplots went on in the background for months). Buti also have fun running long pre-planned campaigns or even published adventures paths (especially for call of Cthulhu). And i had players who enjoyed both, but with different preferences. Basically, no playstyle is "the correct one", you just need to find what you enjoy.

@Spacer X Makes sense. The place where you draw your audience from will shape the hobby. Fantasy fans reinvigorated sales, but demanded campaigns that resembled fantasy novels in exchange. And now, with a history of lumping video games, comic books and anime together at conventions, the shape of 5e doesn't surprise me at all.

I'd argue it's the first one!

Ah yes, the MMOFFRPG

I wonder if there's a way to square both the 'fantasy storytelling' and 'conan simulator' aspects more fully than the products released by wotc (i suspect many OSR titles have attempted this competently). it would probably require DMs and players to have a much more different mindset to what is the dominant thinking both then and now

Players these day consider a campaign a huge adventure with plots sub plot that all leas to an end fight with some boss monster . I've bern playing since 1978 and a campaign lie you said at that time was the world setting where the adventures took place not some grand long adventurer where the players are railroaded along the Dm's story line

@@williamlee7482 not necessarily. There are modern campaigns like that, but there are also modern campaigns that are linked merely by the party of adventurers who form bonds and work together for the duration (which I've recently discovered is another thing that wasn't much of a thing in Old School... Everyone involved in the OSR movement I talk to about it online makes it seem like the characters are moreso game pieces than people being roleplayed.

@@priestesslucy3299 What they are talking about is playing with new groups of people because many old school osr players used to hop around game stores at times to get a feel of how others are playing the game and to learn new DM tricks . Some would stick to their original store and play in groups of up to 10 sometimes on the weekends . I would be playing in 2 diffrent stores and also playing at my local boys club at times but with personal friends we played together at home and our characters stuck together until we reached max level then retired them and made new ones and yes we role play our characters . When it comes osr players playing their characters as game peices that was in the very beginning of the hobby . Buy as time went on people started roleplay their characters and it was for the first few years (5-8 years) because in the 1980s is when the game got really popular and more rpg's were being created that more stores started poping up in many cities . Every store here in South Florida 90% of the players and Dm's play exactly like I've said and know nothing about sandbox/open world play at all because most Dm's try to be Matt Mercer . In Broward county alone there are dozens and dozens of stores and most if not all players stick to one store and play with one group yet they all play d&d the same way . Unlike in the 80s most Dm's lack the creativity to step outside the box and be original and only play from adventurer books and don't make their own adventures . At the store in coral springs Florida where I worked we had 5 groups of d&d players that only played the curse of Strad or the Forgoten Realms adventure ( it had to close a few years back due to the owner having to take care of his mother full time in New York ) and they all ran their games the same way by the book . A campaign isn't a module/adventure book it the setting where they take place that's how it was when we started playing and many times we made our own campaign settings but if a campaign setting caught our eye we would play in it . I've ran many homemade campaign settings and ran only 3 pre made settings , The World Of Greyhawk , The original 1st edition Forgotten Realms and Dark Sun which was my favorite . Nowadays it's very rare to see anyone with a homebrew campaign or who use house rules it's over 90% by the books that wizards keeps pumping out . And there are way to many classes, races , feats and optional rules that most players demand their DM use and they do yet there is no cohesion or logic as to why there are all those thing in the game so to it becomes a muddy mess of a game . Right now there are around 28 to 30 book in price from $35 to $50 mist of which besides the adventure book are basicly wizards house rules on races ,classes , feats and house rules all of which a creative DM could do themselves . I have 3 folders with my homebrew things ranging from created classes to classes and house rules . My race and class folder has campaign specific races and classes in it but some of them are generic in that I allow those certain races and classes in my game . What I'm really trying to say is that Dm's of today need to be a bit more creative in their games and no do much cookie cutter game play , take the rules and add what you want , remove what you don't like because at the end of the day it's your game

Yeah, there's a reason the OSR focuses a lot on PCs being easy to just "roll up" rather than the modern thing where people have huge backstories n' stuff. A fun modern twist on the old way of doing things is Dungeon Crawl Classic's "funnel adventures" where everyone generates at least four level 0 characters, literally just an angry mob of peasants, and forces them through some incredibly cruel Indiana Jones nonsense to see who's lucky enough to become your "real characters".

It'd be interesting to pause a campaign, depending on player attendance, to run side oneshots in flashback format. Those who attend will still gain more XP during the one-shots, and when the campaign resumes, they have new abilities they didn't before the pause. Of course, there would be XP variance between PCs, but I don't care about that and neither did AD&D. Another alternative, as stated in the video, would have two sets of PCs, one for the campaign and another for oneshots, both depending on attendance.

OSR rules may make for having multiple expendable PCs, and yet at the time it took so much time and care for a character to survive and level up that it still made for a virtual tragedy when a well-worn, higher level character died.

@@maul42 100%, but I think that it feels way more meaningful and less lame when it's a character you've become attached to through gameplay, rather than a character you're attached to because you just spent half an hour putting everything you need on the character sheet and *really* don't want to do it all over again.

@@colbyboucher6391 the main problems with dungeon crawl classics Is that eventually you get bored of making a new character even ,10 minutes even once you leave the level 0 tunnel

Double-entry book keeping? A huge calendar?

@@The_Custos Both! I had a big calendar spreadsheet for the broader stuff and kept more detailed timekeeping in my session prep notes. I'd check through to make sure everything was accounted for and the timelines matched.

Exactly what I aspire to bring to my table! The ending in safe zone is trouble concept for my players yet doing so would lend well with the bi weekly miss of a player.

Thanks Baron!

Turn every world you made into a country and have them interact.

Maybe turn them into a multiverse seeing and set your next game as a planehopping adventure with a big planar hub?

That's a way to do it.

leveling was a lot more satisfying

What was mean or unfair?

@@archersfriend5900 Basically, the assumed rivalry between PCs and death at every corner.

@@claude-alexandretrudeau1830 that's what makes it a game and not a story.

The sourcebooks are DLC. Yer not expected to do yer own campaign world. WotC wants a browser game.

oooh... and in STA having them all as crew of the same ship just kinda makes the "where was X" question unneeded.

I'm curious about how common playing multiple characters at once has been. I started in the late 80's as the only player and with 3 characters. Since then I've played two characters simultaneously in one game in the 3rd ed days. Over the recent years I've often played with my wife having two characters while i have one character who's more PC than NPC. Playing more than one character seems good for my attention as well when one character doesn't have an active role in a certain situation.

Once a player has investment in a few characters you also open the door for higher lethality; since you don't need to justify *their* character not dying; cause they are already invested in another character who can take their place, either seeking revenge, or wanting to prove themselves the better; whatever. Having more then one character you're excited to play takes a bit of the sting out of a character dying.

This has been a fascinating concept to me since I've heard about it. The idea of "secondary heroes" that the other group just assumes are DMNPC's creating worldbuilding, is in fact another group of players going along a journey in that same world. How has it worked out for you and do you plan on trying to bridge that gap at some point by inviting everyone in at the same time?

Sorry, man. Somehow I wasn't notified of this. The campaign worked out great for me. It was truly amazing having 2 parties playing in the same world at the same time. And it felt great when I had to describe the consequences of one party's actions for the other, and they had no idea that it were consequences made by actual human players. It the end as the pandemic got under control my friends had less and less time to play so eventually we ended everything and I revealed that there were two parties. They were shocked but enjoyed the revelation. That said lately some of them wanted me to DM again and since I still have the material from that world and all, I'm fleshing out the neighboring kingdom to invite them and new players (some of the secretly) to play in the same world, in the same time period as before. Wish me luck!

And yeah I'd totally invite both parties for the same game session should they ever traveled to the same hex 😅

"The demi-humans are supposed to hit a ceiling and quietly retire, maybe popping briefly back into the campaign when their special talents are needed; bult ultimately they cede the high-level ground to human lords and patriarchs and wizards." That statement no longer flies today, and thank fuck for that. OSR does have some great ideas (like the ones in this video), but I am happy as heck the view of "humans are the top dog" is no longer a thing.

@@LtLukoziuz "Humans are the top dog" is a genre convention of sword & sorcery, most other sub-genres of fantasy, and even a lot of sci-fi. Star Trek, Star Wars, Stargate… all very "HFY." (On the other hand, if you want to see a fantasy setting where it's the humans that hit a ceiling and become irrelevant, just look at Dragon Ball.) "No longer flies today" is a matter of perspective. "Is no longer a popular element of the kind of rudderless kitchen-sink fantasy that modern D&D both models and feeds into" would be a more accurate statement.

@@johnhiggins6602 I kinda make the kitchen sink Fantasy more of a feature than a bug. It’s Star Wars like. You can play everyone but everyone has problems and there’s always evil in all the peoples. The Minotaurs are the baddest around, so have a big Empire. other sentients put up with their fascist, racist state because they keep them safe from the horrific beasts in the wild. Each species bring some flavor and some consequences from integrating with a larger society, but it’s grim and gritty.

D&D 4e was wizards attempt at trying to draw the WOW and MMO crowd into the because the way the was it worked like an MMO with all its daily , at will and encounter powers plus the movement was in squares further emulating an MMO

4th edition is a good game. But it's quite a different beast and appeals more to people who like both rpgs and board games and want a bit more of that tactical battle and balance experience. There's a crowd for the game, but it's probably not having a great overlap with people who are watching this video :)

@@sertaki You do you dude, I could never stand mmo and 4th was essentially that, hell it was supposed to have something like a "companion app" for pc where you would run your game in a sort of virtual table, not my kind of thing.

@@paulll47 Yeah, it's definitely a very different experience. I have played it a bit and mostly enjoyed it, but it's been a while. But I can very confidently say I have 0 desire to run a game of 4, but I'd play in one to get a bit of a different style. :D

i just looked an i also got unsubbed.....weird.

And, with a dozen players at the table, there isn't time for monologuing and bardic recitals. You take yer turn (quickly) then quietly figger out what yer doing next turn. Or spend the time between designing yer "Awesome Stronghold".

👀

Ooph! Sounds like a ton of fun but I'm really bad at keeping notes in my games to begin with.

Yeah, the important thing is that the minutiae tried to *get out of the way* so that you could focus on bigger ideas like this. That's why a lot of things were much simpler.

Adventure is what you get from a dungeon when you don't get what you came for.

So fun the glory days...😂

There is such a thing as using your best judgment.