I suspect this whole thing is just an argument for the sake of argumentation, to "stick it to the grogs" (and fish for quotes for SA). I think Sommerjon actually played little to no games of AD&D that genuinely started at level 1, and if he did, I think he probably would remember it as something "boring" precisely because he didn't have access to nearly as many twink options as he does now with his "builds".

Probably started to use the Players Options in 2nd ed as soon as he possibly could, IF he even was a gamer at the time.

Quote from: Haffrung;693895If they weren't, TSR and WotC are the cleverest publishers in the world, because they've been selling the same game over and over again.

WOTC tried to be.  ' Ze game remains ze same.'

Turned out not to be so clever.

Quote from: Benoist;693881Then you are in the immense minority because I have rarely seen players worry about these kinds of details so far in advance in an AD&D game starting at level 1. I have seen a lot more being worried about surviving to level 2! This is where the make up of the group, the equipment selected, and the like do factor in initial character generation decisions, for many groups (though not all of them). But really, rolling a character in AD&D is just that: it starts with rolling your stats, and then deciding what type of class/race you want to play. Then rolling your starting HPs and initial wealth (yes, you do roll those), then alignment, equipment, roll for initially known spells per DMG (you don't choose whatever the fuck you want) and you're pretty much done.

What happened to the "AD&D was a set of options that you could pick and choose what you used"?  So much for taking the game and making it your own.

You really still worry about getting past level 1?  You have no 'moves' you do to ensure a greater chance of success?  After all of these years you are still some fresh-eyed omg what the hell is going on kid? Please:rolleyes:

Quote from: Benoist;693881So instead of making ludicrous arguments that all things are equal and that CharOp is a "thing" nearly to the same extent from one game to the next, you could make actually salient points like "if you start at level 10 to run a one shot in the Tombs of Horrors, you can totally optimize the party in AD&D!" and that is correct, it is possible, depending on initial gear, whether the DM allows multiclassed/dual-classed characters, how the DM makes you select spells up to your level (could be done entirely randomly, semi-randomly, not randomly at all, or a mixture of all those) and so on. But nope, instead you are making false equivalences which to most people who are not you will come off as "lul wut?" Like what you just wrote here, for instance.

Where did I say things were equal?  Oh I didn't.  I refuted the bullshit that AD&D had no 'builds'.  Was it done differently?  Sure.   Saying it wasn't/couldn't be done...Head meet sand:rolleyes:

In typical rpgsite fashion: Build = ChaOp.  That is bullshit.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;693893No they are not. Having PrC's available to you just opens up more build options. Nothing more.

PrC don't allow people to play a character closer to what they envision their character to actually be?

Quote from: Exploderwizard;693893This is a wordy way to say you cannot really create 1E AD&D fighter builds.

This is a person in denial that people never had plans/builds for their characters in 1e.

Quote from: Benoist;693898I suspect this whole thing is just an argument for the sake of argumentation, to "stick it to the grogs" (and fish for quotes for SA). I think Sommerjon actually played little to no games of AD&D that genuinely started at level 1, and if he did, I think he probably would remember it as something "boring" precisely because he didn't have access to nearly as many twink options as he does now with his "builds".

Isn't one of your favorite lines "in actual play"?
I find it strange that in actual play you never made plans beyond the next die roll, that you never tried to find that perfect spell/item, that you never strived to gain something/anything that best fit your concept for your character.

Quote from: Benoist;693898Probably started to use the Players Options in 2nd ed as soon as he possibly could, IF he even was a gamer at the time.

Guess that chart you have to roll on to see what your reaction is supposed to be is heavily weighted in certain directions.

Quote from: Sommerjon;693958What happened to the "AD&D was a set of options that you could pick and choose what you used"?  So much for taking the game and making it your own.

Man, it's when you're saying things like this that you're showing just how much you really don't understand what it is you are talking about. Otherwise you wouldn't just keep mixing up things like this like they're the same thing or the same topic of conversation at all. It's really just a telling card. I feel sorry you need to run your mouth and keep saying stupid shit like this.

Quote from: Sommerjon;693958You really still worry about getting past level 1?  You have no 'moves' you do to ensure a greater chance of success?  After all of these years you are still some fresh-eyed omg what the hell is going on kid? Please:rolleyes:

Ooooh yes! I was playing just a few months ago in a game where I was the 1st level Cleric and believe me: I was worried we wouldn't make it out of the dungeon! We ran into some swarms of rats and a bunch of wererats and could only escape after a few of our men died and we used all our oil reserves to carefully block passage ways while we retreated to the exit. And it was down to the wire, and a fair amount of luck (we didn't have a complete layout of the corridors and some of them in our backs connected with an intersection just in front of us - we almost got stuck in a rat pincher move but could make it out with a charge), in the end. But we (and by "we", I mean "the survivors") made it! It was a VERY cool game to me.

Quote from: Sommerjon;693958Where did I say things were equal?  Oh I didn't.  I refuted the bullshit that AD&D had no 'builds'.  Was it done differently?  Sure.   Saying it wasn't/couldn't be done...Head meet sand:rolleyes:

In typical rpgsite fashion: Build = ChaOp.  That is bullshit.

Are you saying that AD&D doesn't have "builds" to nearly the same extent as, say, 3e and 4e would? If that is the case, I agree.

Oh, and why didn't you answer to the part where I said you might possibly create "builds" in specific scenarios, like the Tomb of Horrors one shot with 10th level characters, depending on the actual specifics of character generation as determined by the DM?

Quote from: Sommerjon;693958Isn't one of your favorite lines "in actual play"?
I find it strange that in actual play you never made plans beyond the next die roll, that you never tried to find that perfect spell/item, that you never strived to gain something/anything that best fit your concept for your character.

I make decisions to equip my character, I choose a class and a race based on the ability scores I roll, I roll my hit points and my starting wealth, I can't choose my spells because I actually roll for them at level 1, and then actually learn them from scrolls and spell books I find in the game (which requires rolls to learn, btw). That's actual play. Contrarily to you, seems to me, I actually played this game, still play it to this day - see above.

So if your definition of "build" is "making decisions at character generation beyond the next die roll" then yes, I did have "builds" in AD&D. But honestly, at this point your definition of a "build" encompasses anything and everything to the point of becoming meaningless. Good show, I guess?

Quote from: Sommerjon;693958Guess that chart you have to roll on to see what your reaction is supposed to be is heavily weighted in certain directions.

So is yours, my friend. So is yours.

Quote from: Sommerjon;693958This is a person in denial that people never had plans/builds for their characters in 1e.

There comes a time in life when conversing with certain people,that  you wonder if magic is really possible because I swear this must be just like the speak with mud spell.

I don't recall my AD&D characters ever getting to high enough level for planning a build to ever be a consideration. Asking what I will be doing in 5 levels seemed silly, given I was so unsure of surviving the next encounter.  And then, since I was young and capricious, I'd probably want to retire my character and roll up a new one by that point even if I did survive.

I don't think we ever made it beyond 10th level, is my hazy recollection.

Quote from: estar;693835Yeah, Wearing armor all the time is pretty much one of the most common things handwaved away even in the detailed systems like GURPS. Even in LARPS, as uncomfortable as, it was we tried to wear our armor as much as we good because we didn't want to risk having our body pummeled to the ground.

Mmmm I think this instinct might a natural if you putting yourself at risk all the time. I recall reading that in Iraq and in the cities of Mexico that have drug cartel problem people have opted were body armor all the time.

But we know that lots of US Infantry guys removed body armour plates in Iraq and Afghanistan becuase they were too bulky, too heavy and they felt it restricted their movement too much.

Quote from: Sommerjon;693871Lets look at everyone's favorite; Fighter.  Since Fighters have dick(Freehold) in 1e builds beyond what armor and weapons to use I can really only make 'plans'
I've got 9 levels in order to get my shit together to establish my Freehold.
So my very first question to god is.  Do I have to build my freehold or can I take over another or be granted a hold or something along those lines?
If I have to build I am forced to save as much as I can, perhaps even having to take chances, with everyone's lives, for a greater monetary reward or perhaps having to be a bit underhanded or being more amoral, etc.
If I can take over another or be granted one I need to figure out which has the more likely success rate.
If god hasn't given it much thought then I will most likely not play
I do this before stats are even generated.

If you would like to engage in online discussion of rpgs, it is beneficial to engage with the hobby' s lingua franca.  Thought as to what type of stronghold to establish is not what is considered with the concept of character build.  Rather, it belongs in the realm of the character's in game goals.

I am rather fond of character builds when the fancy strikes.  There can be little denying a qualitative difference in the degree to which one can engage in that aspect between TSR D&D and WotC D&D.  If you are trying to argue they are qualitatively similar in this aspect, you are belying an ignorance as to what is actually written in the respective books.

Again a familiar topic spills into vitriol and personal attacks.

D&D has always been about Charop and the development of D&D has been the development of Charop posibilities.

When you roll you 3d6 straight for stats you are at the base level. You still do Charop becuase you get to choose what class you are going to be. You Optimise your character based on what stats you have. Quite a modern idea that most medieval folks were born to be a knight, or drafted into the army or sold to a farmer, or ended up orphans in a city trying to make a living. They did not have choice as to what career would best suit their skills. You are bright and intelligent and you love logical puzzles and music, tough here is a pike try and kill those other peasants before they kill you..

As the game grows people what to optimise their characters the want to play vampires or balrogs, or rangers or paladins. They get these things allowed but they could have just said my fighter is a balrog, but they want extra fire damage, they could have just had their figther act like a paladin but they want a magic pony and an anti-evil aura. Class bloat and race bloat are all about optimising your character making them better through making choices about them.

AD&D let you optimse your stats. 4d6 drop 1 arrange minimum 2 15s....added hosts of character clsses through Dragon some of which made it to UA. None of those new classes were like a figther but a bit weaker, they were all packed with special class powers, detect this, immune to that, extra this , super that...

CharOp just kept on growing. Dual class, multiclass, specialisation gives us the Dart master Build (and it is a fucking Build and no mistake).

2e tries to slow it down, but lacks the balls to do it. Barbarians are a fighter kit (no special powers just some skills and an attitude) Assasins are a Rogue kit (no specical powers etc) but Rangers are still rangers and Paladins still get magic powers, and eventually the kits go from roleplay fluff and a free skill to subclasses, because that is what the players want, they want to make up characters that are more powerful than everyone else's. Skills and Powers and 3e are inevitable.  

If you want an easy bet then bet that the most popular optional Next book will be the one that lets you uber customise.

Wow, I was thinking of answering seriously, but really? You guys lost me big time via the current twist in the conversation.

Quote from: jibbajibba;694124D&D has always been about Charop and the development of D&D has been the development of Charop posibilities..

Char op has always been in D&D, but D&D hasn't always been about it.  Otherwise everyone would be using the method of stat generation from Unearthed Arcana in AD&D, or always playing the most powerful class that stats allowed for.

And they didn't.  D&D has always been about character archetype foremost

Do CharOP fans buy more books?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;694236Char op has always been in D&D, but D&D hasn't always been about it.  Otherwise everyone would be using the method of stat generation from Unearthed Arcana in AD&D, or always playing the most powerful class that stats allowed for.

And they didn't.  D&D has always been about character archetype foremost

You see I would love to think that but that doesn't explain the development of D&D very well.

Quote from: BillDo CharOP fans buy more books?

Whereas this does .....

Quote from: jibbajibba;694245Whereas this does .....

Is it that CharOpers buy more books or that WOTC really has only made books for CharOPers?

Clearly under their 3e-4e business model that's who they made product for but then concluding that those people are the ones that will always buy the most books strikes me as a good example of the streetlight effect.

Quote from: Piestrio;694248Is it that CharOpers buy more books or that WOTC really has only made books for CharOPers?

Clearly under their 3e-4e business model that's who they made product for but then concluding that those people are the ones that will always buy the most books strikes me as a good example of the streetlight effect.

No guarantee, but wouldn't the most likely scenario be businessmen pushing the types of books that sell the best?