Quote from: thecasualoblivion;499260First of is Clerics, and the first thing I notice is that their Hit Die is 1d6+1, which is mathematically similar to 1d8.

Next up is the Fighting Man. He gets 1d6+2 as his Hit Die(again, mathematically similar to 1d10),

Rounding out things is the Magic User, who gets 1d6-1 HP per level(again, similar to the d4)

Eh? D6+x isn't similar to any of the other die types.

Quote from: Ladybird;499725Eh? D6+x isn't similar to any of the other die types.

By mathematically similar, I think TCO is referring mostly to average result (and to a lesser extent range) rather than the physical dice.

Quote from: Skywalker;499726By mathematically similar, I think TCO is referring mostly to average result (and to a lesser extent range) rather than the physical dice.

Range is the important thing, though, unless you're making a lot of characters. He didn't mention what happens at each level. Is it another die roll or is it a fixed number of hit points gained?

Quote from: Benoist;499257Horseshit, and lame trolling at that.

You are baiting, TCO. You can go fuck yourself.

TCO, ignore this fat troll.  He supports the game ONLY because the creator is a member on that elitist site.

In other words, Benoist, follow your own advice...

Quote from: CRKrueger;499667If everyone is so convinced he's a troll that all they say is "Troll. Nothing to see here, move along." then there's no engagement.  If everyone just assumes he's posting in bad faith, no one feeds the troll.  So, he'll try to not obviously troll.

I for one, CRK, find that a sick form of enjoyment for my degenerated pallete.

Quote from: estar;499723I recommend this site as a good initial starting point.

http://www.philotomy.com/

Amen!

TCO, if you're familiar with TSR-era D&D (by way of AD&D 2e) and dislike it, you'd be well served to read Philotomy's Musings. In my own experience (grounded in BECMIU/RC and 2e, not entirely unlike yourself IIRC), his clear and thoughtful writings do a great job of bridging the gap between our own early gaming experience, and the sensibilities that informed its "old school" roots.

Either way, I feel it might make your reading of S&W more interesting.

Quote from: estar;499723I don't care if he does, so far many of the questions and points he brings up have been brought by people back in the day.

So, because someone else talked about this stuff on another site a year ago, no one is allowed to talk about it on RPGSite now, even if it's the first time they've read through the books?

Quote from: danbuter;499789So, because someone else talked about this stuff on another site a year ago, no one is allowed to talk about it on RPGSite now, even if it's the first time they've read through the books?

Let's break this down

Original post I replied

Quote from: Exploderwizard;499700In that case you can present what you have read but when it comes to drawing any conclusions about the material and how it feels in actual play just please shut yer trap.

So Exploderwizard tells TCO to shut his trap about his conclusions and how it feels in actual play.

And I reply

Quote from: estar;499723I don't care if he does

And Exploderwizard also attacks TCO with

Quote from: Exploderwizard;499700So basically you are saying that you have no firstand experience playing old school D&D and all this crap is based strictly off of what you have read.

And I point out how bogus this is because people who have played OD&D ask the same damn questions and make the same comments.

Quote from: estar;499723I don't care if he does, so far many of the questions and points he brings up have been brought by people back in the day.

Yes by this year, 2012 there been dozens of rounds of debates, discussions and Q&As (some with the original authors) about points TCO brought up. People should go and read them.

And then have their own discussion about it. Particularly in the case of OD&D where there no book answer for various aspects of the game. Only options based on what people used in their own campaigns.

Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;499732Trolling troll troll.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;499700So basically you are saying that you have no firstand experience playing old school D&D and all this crap is based strictly off of what you have read.

In that case you can present what you have read but when it comes to drawing any conclusions about the material and how it feels in actual play just please shut yer trap.

Pretty fucking stupid response, especially given that from what I'm seeing thus far (p.3) he's been doing a fair and honest report on this game.

Seriously, I'm no 4e fan but this kind of shit is what pisses me off about the OSR.  "We just want you to give old school games a look".

"Ok, I will.. hmm, this is interesting but very different from the D&D I'm used to"

"Shut the fuck up!! You can't know unless you played the game in 1974!!!"

Fuck's sake.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;499931"Shut the fuck up!! You can't know unless you played the game in 1974!!!"

Fuck's sake.

RPGPundit

Hell no. He could have played it  for the first time last week for all I care.

Reading a rulebook when all you have experince playing are systems where the rules try to represent the lions share of the game won't grant much insight.

Quote from: RPGPundit;499931Pretty fucking stupid response, especially given that from what I'm seeing thus far (p.3) he's been doing a fair and honest report on this game.

Seriously, I'm no 4e fan but this kind of shit is what pisses me off about the OSR.  "We just want you to give old school games a look".

"Ok, I will.. hmm, this is interesting but very different from the D&D I'm used to"

"Shut the fuck up!! You can't know unless you played the game in 1974!!!"

Fuck's sake.

RPGPundit

HA HA HA  well said...

Quote from: RPGPundit;499931Pretty fucking stupid response, especially given that from what I'm seeing thus far (p.3) he's been doing a fair and honest report on this game.

Seriously, I'm no 4e fan but this kind of shit is what pisses me off about the OSR.  "We just want you to give old school games a look".

"Ok, I will.. hmm, this is interesting but very different from the D&D I'm used to"

"Shut the fuck up!! You can't know unless you played the game in 1974!!!"

Fuck's sake.

RPGPundit

Here's a thing, though, Pundit...the guy has said "I'm here to shitpost, to troll, and if I don't catch someone the first time around I'll step up my game."  Benoist links to the post where tco says this in just about every reply.  So...telling tco he's shitposting and to STFU is pretty much accurate in this case.

Quote from: RPGPundit;499931Fuck's sake.

RPGPundit

The part you're missing is that TCO never ever posts in good faith. He's a shit-stirrer, has always been, for years now. You might decide like others to give him a chance etc etc. That's fine by me. You are going to be disappointed. Sooner or later.

I'm an asshole, but I like to think that I'm a fair asshole.  Despite my prejudiced, opinionated nature, I strive for impartiality.  TCO is, in my mind, an idiot.  Not that he is stupid--quite the opposite I suspect--but that he is a stubborn mule of individual with battered woman syndrome toward WotC's unethical corporate practices.  In fact, I suspect that if Mike Mearls personally knocked him down and dumped in his mouth, TCO would beam with pride through a warm mouthful.

However.  Though I might find TCO irritating, naive, willfully ignorant, and irrational, I do not believe he is trolling.  He says he loves to argue, but that is not the same as trolling.  Darwin?  He's a troll.  A shit-slinger whose main arguments are insults and mockery.  TCO, on the other hand, seems to be willing to engage people in actual debate and argue in good faith.