Quote from: Abyssal Maw;361382So wait, would a rule whereby a character with the arcane power source is allowed to automatically set fire to buildings be new school or old school? I consider that kind of an innovation.

Power sources aren't in any other edition of D&D that I'm aware of, so it would be hard to say. However, in my D&D games (which most people consider old school), anyone able to make fire can try to set a building on fire. A magic-user might try with Burning Hands or the like, but anyone could do it with flint and steel, a burning brand, etc. No special power sources, feats, skills, or rules required.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;361374Quickly! Coordinate the grievances!

When the same complaints come from the same persons every single time, it's less a matter of a conspiracy against one group and more a matter of that one group continually being douchebags.

Quote from: Imperator;361380Very good ideas, too. Care to elaborate a bit on them, maybe in another thread?

I have a description of a version of these rules I wrote up for S&W on my blog:
Hit Points and Body Points for Swords & Wizardry.

This description has 100% HP recovery on as night's sleep. To get the rules I used originally just substitute 75%. The reason for 75% was that I noticed if (in real life) I really exhaust myself completely, one night's sleep still leaves me less than 100% of my normal oomph the next day.

Stormbringer is obsessed with me as usual.

No, the reason I bring it up; it's a rule from Chainmail.

Quote from: Imperator;361380I see where you come from, but I'm afraid that most times casting a 1st level spell is not a big fucking deal, not by a long stretch.

I think a lot of that's a matter of skewed perspectives, though -- people who are more focused on higher-level play, or on combat as the primary activity of the game and the only thing that matters. True, a lot of the 1st level spells would be pretty unimpressive if it's the only spell you know (light, detect magic, hold portal, etc.) but the "big two" -- sleep and charm person -- both qualify as big fucking deals from the perspective of the 0-level baseline -- the former can instantly drop a dozen or more men and there's nothing they can do about it, the latter can turn any person (including a king, or a high priest, or a wizard) who fails his saving throw into a virtual slave of the caster for at least a few days, possibly longer. Both of those are way more powerful than anything any other class can do at 1st level, and are downright miraculous from the perspective of what a typical 0-level person (i.e. 99% of the population of the game-world) can ever do.

Even a seemingly-innocuous utility spell like read languages is pretty miraculous in effect when compared to what a normal person without the spell can accomplish -- it allows the caster to read and understand any writing in any language, which isn't going to kill anybody, but is still a pretty big deal (and, in fact, in my play experience this seems to be one of the most commonly nerfed spells, when the GM has some code or enigma he wants the players to have to puzzle out or be mystified by and not be able to short-circuit by casting a "lowly" 1st level spell).

Quote from: One Horse Town;361363A casual search hasn't shown up any obvious sockpuppetry.

Of course AM still got the slander in without any real repercussion.

!i!

Quote from: jibbajibba;361379Just to be a pedant. This isn't entirely true. the Junior version I played last night with my daughter has quite different rules and one assumes the rules of the Monopoly card game are somewhat different what with their not being a board and all. And the DVD edition must surely have expansions of some type.

Minor variations, to be sure.  I submit that Monopoly Junior is the same as B/X or BECMI D&D, while Monopoly would be the same as AD&D.  I didn't say every variant of Monopoly is exactly the same as the original game.  What I did say is that the original game and the original rules are virtually unchanged over the course of a century.  If rules could be objectively improved, I would assume someone would have put some effort into 'improving' Monopoly in that time.  D&D has had 'improvements' every five to seven years, on average.  We should be seeing Monopoly v20 by now, if that were the case.

QuoteJust cos you only play OMonopoly at home and can match the rules up to the patent doesn't mean the rest of us haven't moved on to Monopoly 4e (which if you ask me is more of a MMO than a real board game).

QuoteAlso if someone released a monopoly game about collecting various forms of bacteria and combining them to create the strongest form of life on an alien planet there would not be a hue and cry as no one woudl give a Shit (unless it wasn't Hasbro in which case they would sue their arses back to the 19th century).

Don't take this the wrong way, but I assume you don't spend much time at BoardGameGeek.  Slight manufacturing variances in game pieces across printings nearly cause riots over there.  They make theRPGsite look like opium addled catatonic Thorazine patients.

QuoteIn fact I can easily image a Monopoly variant in which the streets were replaced with features of bacterial families and when you got them all rather than adding houses and hotels you bred 'colonies' and when someone else landed on them they had to pay disease points

But that is, from a design standpoint, a minor cosmetic change.  Much like the location based sets you mentioned earlier, there are no real changes to the rules.  I can take my AD&D books, rename all the classes, and in short order I could be playing a game of Star Wars.  Or Lord of the Rings.  Or Dune.  Or any of a number of other genres or settings.  Switching the names doesn't change the underlying rules.

QuoteTo the outsider I expect that AD&D And 4E D&D would look quite the same. You all sit round a table prending to be elves and Warriors (no they are not elves they are Trieflings!) and you decide what you do and roll a d20 to see if it worked ....

That is an extremely superficial view.  At that magnification, your theoretical outsider likely wouldn't be able to discern D&D from whist, Warhammer, or a writer's workshop.  A quick overview of classes from both editions, however, and even the most casual gamer will see clear differences, although they will likely not have the historical background to realize how radical those changes are.

QuoteThe difference between a 2e Barbarian and a 4e Dragonborn is probably about the same as replacing the Top Hat with a kangaroo, and an at will power replacing a stunt is akin to being allowed to mortage properites or not... I would guess ... to the untrained observer... possibly.

Emphasis mine.

There are no 'stunts' in AD&D, hence, an at-will power is utterly unable to replace them in any way.  While some Fighter feats from 3.x may have some level of replication in 4e powers, for the most part, feats and powers are not remarkably similar.  Division of combat actions into at-will, encounter and daily abilities is strikingly different than previous versions, to the point that you aren't using a board for movement and keeping track of your hotels anymore, instead you have 'villages' and 'cities' on a large hex map.

Quote from: Ian Absentia;361392Of course AM still got the slander in without any real repercussion.

!i!

My point exactly.

Quote from: Imperator;361380But it definitely should.

I guess between yourself and WinkingBishop, I have a popular board game to start working on.  

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;361388No, the reason I bring it up; it's a rule from Chainmail.

But Chainmail also allows wizards to cast either a fireball or a lightning bolt every single round. D&D magic-users obviously don't have this ability, so the only way to reconcile the sources is to assume that all wizards in Chainmail must have a wand of the appropriate type. Which is the key to making a "blaster" combat-oriented magic-user in old D&D -- the spell-casting system isn't really set up for it (both because of the limited slots and also due to the ease of disrupting spells cast in combat) so you need to get a wand (that functions automatically every round and can have up to 100 charges). The problem, then, is stingy GMs who are afraid to place such items where low level characters might be able to get ahold of them, or if they do, limit them to a tiny number of charges, thus relegating magic-user PCs to being second-class and not being able to take their rightful place in combat as "the guys who use wands"

Quote from: T. Foster;361390I think a lot of that's a matter of skewed perspectives, though -- people who are more focused on higher-level play, or on combat as the primary activity of the game and the only thing that matters. True, a lot of the 1st level spells would be pretty unimpressive if it's the only spell you know (light, detect magic, hold portal, etc.) but the "big two" -- sleep and charm person -- both qualify as big fucking deals from the perspective of the 0-level baseline -- the former can instantly drop a dozen or more men and there's nothing they can do about it, the latter can turn any person (including a king, or a high priest, or a wizard) who fails his saving throw into a virtual slave of the caster for at least a few days, possibly longer. Both of those are way more powerful than anything any other class can do at 1st level, and are downright miraculous from the perspective of what a typical 0-level person (i.e. 99% of the population of the game-world) can ever do.

Even a seemingly-innocuous utility spell like read languages is pretty miraculous in effect when compared to what a normal person without the spell can accomplish -- it allows the caster to read and understand any writing in any language, which isn't going to kill anybody, but is still a pretty big deal (and, in fact, in my play experience this seems to be one of the most commonly nerfed spells, when the GM has some code or enigma he wants the players to have to puzzle out or be mystified by and not be able to short-circuit by casting a "lowly" 1st level spell).

I've been saying this for years. The players in my current group make fun of my attitude some by calling Magic Missile, "Slay Commoner."

I like the idea of a first level wizard being respected.

A Magic Missile has the energy to half kill any living person, in my opinion, but experienced characters can always get out of the way.

Quote from: Ian Absentia;361392Of course AM still got the slander in without any real repercussion.

!i!

Shit man, when are there ever repercussions for slander here? That's just par for the course. Not taking sides, I'm just sayin'....

Quote from: T. Foster;361397But Chainmail also allows wizards to cast either a fireball or a lightning bolt every single round. D&D magic-users obviously don't have this ability, so the only way to reconcile the sources is to assume that all wizards in Chainmail must have a wand of the appropriate type. Which is the key to making a "blaster" combat-oriented magic-user in old D&D -- the spell-casting system isn't really set up for it (both because of the limited slots and also due to the ease of disrupting spells cast in combat) so you need to get a wand (that functions automatically every round and can have up to 100 charges). The problem, then, is stingy GMs who are afraid to place such items where low level characters might be able to get ahold of them, or if they do, limit them to a tiny number of charges, thus relegating magic-user PCs to being second-class and not being able to take their rightful place in combat as "the guys who use wands"

I never noticed this in 1e. I remember a long time ago, I was in a game of 1e with a guy playing a 6th level invoker specialist. In a fight with a dragon, he cast something like 12 spells on it. Magic missiles, chromatic orbs, acid arrows, lightning bolts and fireballs. It was pretty sick.

Quote from: Cranewings;361401I never noticed this in 1e. I remember a long time ago, I was in a game of 1e with a guy playing a 6th level invoker specialist. In a fight with a dragon, he cast something like 12 spells on it. Magic missiles, chromatic orbs, acid arrows, lightning bolts and fireballs. It was pretty sick.

IIRC, the only specialist wizard in 1e AD&D was the Illusionist.  Invoker specialists did come around until 2e AD&D.

Quote from: IMLegend;361399Shit man, when are there ever repercussions for slander here? That's just par for the course. Not taking sides, I'm just sayin'....

and if there were the same people would be crying about infringements on free speech.