TheRPGSite

(And in the quest to spawn more game-related discussions...)

I've seen some people describing Benoist's fantasy RPG references (pre-UA 1st ed. AD&D) as "fantasy fucking Vietnam".

(Yes, I pay attention. Even when lurking. And often I remember.)

But, since I'm pretty new around here, I missed all the discussions where this might have been explicated.

So, I'm throwing it out to the peanut gallery, Benoist in particular, to explain what exactly this means.

(Also, I'm assuming America's years, not pre-Dien Bien Phu, despite Ben's French origins. Just an assumption, mind, feel free to correct me.)

I took it to mean the old school dungeons where players went inch-by-inch, carefully checking for traps with ten-foot poles and such... kinda like the troops in Vietnam, checking for booby traps.

Quote from: Simlasa;627451I took it to mean the old school dungeons where players went inch-by-inch, carefully checking for traps with ten-foot poles and such... kinda like the troops in Vietnam, checking for booby traps.

This, and grit, and lethality.  If you let your guard down, you died.  Save or die.  None of this "fail your save and you're still oK.  Just take a penalty to Con for awhlie"

Pretty much my interpretation, too. I interpret it to mean the play style where attrition is a major danger. How long can the party continue? Do we turn back because Joe lost his fighter, or do we just let him play one of the mercs? Have we lost too many supplies? Did dropping that rock to test the depth of that pit accidentally alert something nasty in the dark, and now it's waiting in ambush?

I believe it was Old Geezer who coined the phrase, but I'm not sure.

I've seen some people use the phrase in a slightly different way, something like "the same thing, but cranked up to 11" or something akin to fantasy survival horror. I'd like to see some discussion about the different variants people link to that term.

Also ambushes.

One of the early uses of the phrase: http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?407357-What-system-for-quot-subterranean-fantasy-fucking-Vietnam-quot

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;627458Also ambushes.

One of the early uses of the phrase: http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?407357-What-system-for-quot-subterranean-fantasy-fucking-Vietnam-quot

Yeah, I was just reaidng that thread, which apparently marks Multipass as the originator of the phrase. And that's a good example of the different meanings I was talking about, because the original quote just looks like a reference to the attrition I was talking about, but the thread is about literally playing up the Vietnam references.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;627458Also ambushes.

One of the early uses of the phrase: http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?407357-What-system-for-quot-subterranean-fantasy-fucking-Vietnam-quot

See, that sounds pretty cool. Sort of like The Black Company.

A war, an actual war, where the overworld is being invaded by a coalition of ancient evils from the Underdark, and PC's are enlisted in the war to fight in the vast tunnels below civilization. All the dungeon delving isn't for treasure or glory, but to infiltrate and exterminate the enemy.

(Mind flayers, or what-have-you. Drow, if you want to hew too close to the obvious answer. Wormlings and Mojave rattlers from Deadlands: Hell on Earth would be really twisted. Plus a legion of humans, kept as slaves and bred by the enemy, brainwashed to hate the surface dwellers.)

Set it in a city like Ptolus, where there was a large dungoneering tradition anyway. Adventurers are mercenaries hired by the city, or special forces troops with extensive experience in the deep places of the world, where dark things sleep.

Yeah, I could hang with a campaign like that.

I think of it as a sub-genre within which one can play old-school D&D. If you imagine that Ravenloft is "D&D as gothic horror" and Dark Sun is "D&D as post-apocalyptic" then Fantasy Fucking Vietnam is "D&D as a Vietnam war movie".

I consider the styles inspirations to be movies like Apocalypse Now, Deer Hunter, Full Metal Jacket, and Platoon, and books like Glen Cook's The Black Company and Joe Abercrombie's The Heroes.

Here's what it's like in play:
1. PC casualties are high.  Death is random and sometimes pointless. Moral virtue is no insulation.
2. The PCs might have the equivalent of tanks (fighters in magic plate armor) and air support (mages with fireballs) but the NPCs are dangerous because they have viciousness and cunning. They use poisoned punji stakes, hidden ambushes, and twisting underground tunnels in the wilderness.
3. It's not particularly clear that the PCs are good or that their cause is just. But it's not that the NPCs are good or just either; in fact, the NPCs are inhumane and ruthless. Both sides do awful things. The innocent bystanders tend to get killed.
4. Nobody goes into the Shit and comes out unchanged. Characters get cursed, mutated, polymorphed, their Constitution gets depleted, their levels get drained. There are fates worse than death.
5. By the time adventurers are successful enough to be seen as heroes or lords, they are too damaged to enjoy the fame and glory.
6. In its bleakness, it has similarities to Lovecraftian horror, except that the soul-destroying evils don't require Cthulhu; they are inflicted by man on man.

This is more-or-less my favored GMing style. The permanent wound chart and tampering with mortality chart in ACKS give some of the overtones.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;627460A war, an actual war, where the overworld is being invaded by a coalition of ancient evils from the Underdark, and PC's are enlisted in the war to fight in the vast tunnels below civilization. All the dungeon delving isn't for treasure or glory, but to infiltrate and exterminate the enemy.

That sounds a lot like a book I read, The Descent by Jeff Long. As literature it's total crap IMO (still stands as second worst book I've ever read)... but there are some interesting ideas to take away from it. Set in modern day though, not medieval (though it gave me a great sense of how scary goblins and such might be in an Underdark-like setting).

I've also seen the term (minus 'fucking') used for fantasy wargames that don't go with tightly ranked units, columns and rows... because of the nature of magic and fantasy creatures making that sort of combat ill-advised... so battles end up looking more like sci-fi skirmish games ala 40K.

Quote from: amacris;627461I consider the styles inspirations to be movies like Apocalypse Now, Deer Hunter, Full Metal Jacket, and Platoon, and books like Glen Cook's The Black Company and Joe Abercrombie's The Heroes.

Gears of War. Invasion of the sub-surfacers, adventures in the deep below, discovering that the evil invasion you've been fighting is just another barbarian migration being driven by something even worse.

A great city, the shining city at the center of the world, built atop the ruins of another civilization, which vanished a million years ago. Below that lurks evil beings who worship the End of All. Their very religion drives them to kill and kill, until no sentient beings are left alive.

And those are the pansies, being driven from their homes by an evil older and greater than they...

Two Words

Tucker's Kobolds

The War is everywhere. The Seven Kings, who rule the shining city, are dragooning peasants and nobles alike, and sending them into the dark to fight and die.

No one can avoid service, save for licensed and bonded adventurers. So you're miles down the mountain, in a tiny village, being hired by the village elders to raid the tunnel that just opened up in the town square.

Black vapors rise from the hole, and high pitched wails. Shortly, the forces of the enemy will pour forth. Unless you can seal it first.

So you go into the deep.

We have always been at war with Menzoberranzan?

Looks like everyone's brought up the salient points before I could make it to the thread. Cool. :)

To summarize and not leave you in the cold, since you addressed me specifically in the OP: it's basically a combination of what the others have said:

You are not a hero. You're an adventurer, a tomb raider, a grizzled veteran going deep under the earth in hostile territory like you'd take a trip through the jungle. You have no guarantee to make it back to the surface. You'd like to strike it rich, but for that you need to survive, and your wits, your companions, your experience are your best weapons in the fight. Maybe there's an Assassin in the group who'll get stupid and try to stab you in the back for a purse or a gem or a magic item at some point. You'll deal with it when it comes up. There will be booby-traps, ambushes along the way. There... there are things down there that look human but don't know the meaning of mercy. It's better to be prepared. To have the right equipment, to go about exploring the place not fooling around and collaborate with the other members of your [strike]squad[/strike] adventuring party, because if you don't, you'll die. Somewhere, somehow. Doesn't really matter. So you better load up that crossbow, memorize that magic missile, fasten your sword tight and keep it at the ready, because you're going to have to make them count at some point, sooner rather than later.

(http://i2.listal.com/image/2225626/500full.jpg)

I'll add that this style of play can be all kinds of fun but perhaps not for those who get too invested in thier characters.

Attrition rates are high so the campaign should be set up to allow for a continuous stream of new characters without too much worrying about backstory or relationships with other party members. Those things can be developed in play if you survive long enough for them to matter. Heck even naming your character before 2nd level is bad luck in some games.

Surviving multiple adventures can make you a legend.

Quote from: Benoist;627550(http://i2.listal.com/image/2225626/500full.jpg)

"How can you shoot women, or children?"

"Easy! You just don't lead 'em so much!"

Huh.  I though that term was originally meant to describe old-school D&D play in a derogatory manner.  "The More You Know..."


Rules for Post-Apocalyptic, Fantastic Medieval, Survival Horror Treasure Hunt Campaigns, Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures

;)

Quote from: The Were-Grognard;627567Huh.  I though that term was originally meant to describe old-school D&D play in a derogatory manner.  "The More You Know..."

It probably was, going by that original quote that seems to have coined the term:

QuoteSo D&D is different now. Good. I can actually walk around feeling like a badass wizard hero now instead of a 4hp mook trapped in some subterranean fantasy fucking Vietnam.

But people started reclaiming it in various positive ways.

Yeah, I always saw it as criticism of mega-dungeons, which were more in vogue in 1e than more modern games.

Which mega-dungeons aren't my thing, but I'll freely admit that's a playstyle argument, and poor past experiences on my part (i.e. "pixel-bitching the dungeon").

And here's the original phrase, in context:

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?399100-Traditional-D-amp-D-D-amp-D-is-all-about-taking-their-stuff-Killing-them-not-so-much&p=8987631#post8987631

always thought of it as "disposable heroes," like how we played b/x & ad&d back in the early/mid 80s.

Ah, a blast from the past. Takes me back to my own days in 'Nam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tottenham).

I particularly liked this one (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?407357-What-system-for-quot-subterranean-fantasy-fucking-Vietnam-quot&p=9181294#post9181294).... :D

To me, I find running whole campaigns of "Fantasy Fucking Vietnam" pretty stupid.  On the other hand, I love it when a regular campaign has short MOMENTS of "Fantasy Fucking Vietnam".

RPGPundit

"If you are out of everything except enemy, you are in combat."

Quote from: Benoist;627550To summarize and not leave you in the cold, since you addressed me specifically in the OP:

Thanks Ben. Thanks, everybody else. I appreciate the info.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;628050Thanks Ben. Thanks, everybody else. I appreciate the info.

You're very welcome.

What the man said. Very welcome. :)

I came into this thread hoping to hear about the race of Man hunting communist hobbits down their holes. Or from the other side, the race of The People fighting a guerilla war against foreign ogres.

When I first posted this thread, I got a couple of posts in, and got distracted by a shiny new idea.

Well, that was a few months ago, so I'm back to grok the original meaning. Of all the posts, this is the most illustrative:

Quote from: Benoist;627550You are not a hero. (And other evocative stuff.)

So, let me restate: This is fantasy roleplaying at its "grittiest". A desperate expedition into the (largely) unexplored tunnel complexes, said tunnels being filled with enemies (human and otherwise) and deadly traps.

The goals may be to neutralize enemies, become rich, or locate a specific treasure. (Among other possible goals.) All of those require negotiating dimly-lit, hazardous passages deep beneath the earth.

The death toll is high, because missteps are easy to make, and mistakes are nearly always lethal. Which means this mode is probably:

Quote from: Exploderwizard;627558not for those who get too invested in thier characters.

I think I've got the basic concept. Apologies for the misunderstandings.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;651082So, let me restate: This is fantasy roleplaying at its "grittiest". A desperate expedition into the (largely) unexplored tunnel complexes, said tunnels being filled with enemies (human and otherwise) and deadly traps.

The goals may be to neutralize enemies, become rich, or locate a specific treasure. (Among other possible goals.) All of those require negotiating dimly-lit, hazardous passages deep beneath the earth.

The death toll is high, because missteps are easy to make, and mistakes are nearly always lethal. Which means this mode is probably

Yes, as far as Fantasy Fucking Vietnam is concerned, mind you, which is another notch up in the ladder of lethality and grittiness from what I'd consider "normal" OS dungeon crawling. So FFV is gritty, deadly, but it gives the players a fighting chance nonetheless, if they're smart, well organized, etc. It's not the magical misery tour, in other words. It's a challenge, a hard one, and there's no actual challenge if you can't possibly win ever in the first place.

Gritty, yes. Misery tourism, no.

Up the ladder of FFV in even grittier deadly territory, as an uber-challenge implying death even when you're doing everything right, with the challenge itself being how long/how many characters it'd take you to "win", you'll find something like Tomb of Horrors, which is thus NOT the base line of dungeon adventuring, let's be clear about that.

Quote from: Benoist;651091Yes, as far as Fantasy Fucking Vietnam is concerned, mind you, which is another notch up in the ladder lethality and grittiness from what I'd consider "normal" OS dungeon crawling.

Which would be largely the same thing, but with the lethality dialed down a little? (Or a lot.)

EDIT:

Video game analogy: FFV is "hardcore mode" for dungeoncrawling. Easy to die, but a challenge, and for people who like that, overcoming a fair and difficult challenge is viscerally fulfilling.

Quote from: Benoist;651091Gritty, yes. Misery tourism, no.

If it was Luke Crane or any story game author using the descriptions in this thread, Misery Tourism is exactly what you'd call it.

And really is exactly what it is. But it being in a dungeon makes it all cool.

Video games in the FFV vein a fun as well...

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;651092Which would be largely the same thing, but with the lethality dialed down a little? (Or a lot.)

EDIT:

Video game analogy: FFV is "hardcore mode" for dungeoncrawling. Easy to die, but a challenge, and for people who like that, overcoming a fair and difficult challenge is viscerally fulfilling.

Basically yes, that's what I'm implying. FFV from my standpoint is not just more lethal, but more difficult, in terms of challenge, generally speaking. Whether we're talking puzzles, tactics, resource management and so on.

Quote from: Benoist;651099FFV from my standpoint is not just more lethal, but more difficult, in terms of challenge, generally speaking. Whether we're talking puzzles, tactics, resource management and so on.

More puzzles/traps, more complex puzzles/traps, a greater emphasis on encumbrance (which limits available resources like food, light, ammunition, and so forth).

As regards tactics, I assume you're talking about how to approach the dungeon, rather than fighting tactics.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;651104As regards tactics, I assume you're talking about how to approach the dungeon, rather than fighting tactics.

Yes. Tactics in a general sense.

The more I read, the more it sounds like a primitive version of Torchbearer.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;651104...

The Bandit level of the Brazen Crown (working name) (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?p=579792#post579792) could possibly make for a good setting for FFV. In terms of a basic dungeon crawling, it's not a level that's meant to be "cleaned up" right away in the campaign. You're going to go back and forth at different points of the campaign to and from this place, more like, rather than just wiping it out to be done once and for all with it at level 1-3. It could be usable for hardcore FFV not so much in terms of puzzles and the like, but in terms of exploration, with specific objectives and get in and out of the place alive, of taking over the place and so on, this can be quite a challenge because it's a primary lair with a lot of stuff going on inside.

So you can play some pretty standard dungeon crawling if you're exploring and then decide to avoid the place for a while or hire some help, become part of a guild or become a Lord or whatnot to be able to take it later on in the campaign, but if you are playing with just that at low level you can have some pretty hardcore games out of it.

I'm going to describe all that later on in the series along with the possible objectives bringing players to the level, possible evolutions of the level throughout the campaign, and so on.

See I always took it to mean implied play style of not holding captured territory. As in the endless cycle of players leave home base with objective, clear area of monsters, then return to home base. Then monsters return to cleared area. Similar to how army patrols would leave base, clear the area of VC, then return to base and the VC creep back into cleared areas.

Pete

Quote from: gleichman;651093If it was Luke Crane or any story game author using the descriptions in this thread, Misery Tourism is exactly what you'd call it.

And really is exactly what it is. But it being in a dungeon makes it all cool.

Not really. Misery Tourism is defined by the lack of a fighting chance. Players in Fantasy Fucking Vietnam, like soldiers in the eponymous war, have the odds stacked up against them, forcing them to wise up to the dangers of the dungeon. But a proper old school dungeon crawl isn't unbeatable. Even the infamous Tomb of Horrors, which Gygax created to best his cleverest players (Ernie Gygax and Rob Kuntz) was "defeated" by a combination of tactical thinking and luck.

Quote from: pspahn;651192See I always took it to mean implied play style of not holding captured territory. As in the endless cycle of players leave home base with objective, clear area of monsters, then return to home base. Then monsters return to cleared area. Similar to how army patrols would leave base, clear the area of VC, then return to base and the VC creep back into cleared areas.

Pete

Look at pages 107 and 109 of your AD&D 1st ed player's handbook. The advice for Successful Adventures include the mention of the party deciding on an objective, going for it, and then, making it back to town and/or taking a break from the dungeon, going about their business in the wilderness, selling loot, hiring henchmen and the like, then deciding on another objective, and going back to the dungeon from there. Like "this time we're going to go back at this entrance we found and see what's in there" and go.

Vacuums in the dungeon are usually filled by other monsters. If you include factions and the like, the dynamic in the dungeon is going to change over time: this group is going to grow, this other one is going to shrink, this one is going to be wiped out after the PCs did most of the work because that other group will take the opportunity while the PCs are in town. This level is going to be taken over by this overpopulated faction of that other level. This trap is going to be reset by the duergar, but not that one, because it's magical and they're afraid of it. Etc. Think of it as a dynamic place. Not a still picture "on pause" while the PCs are away.

Quote from: The Butcher;651216Misery Tourism is defined by the lack of a fighting chance. Players in Fantasy Fucking Vietnam, like soldiers in the eponymous war, have the odds stacked up against them, forcing them to wise up to the dangers of the dungeon. But a proper old school dungeon crawl isn't unbeatable. Even the infamous Tomb of Horrors, which Gygax created to best his cleverest players (Ernie Gygax and Rob Kuntz) was "defeated" by a combination of tactical thinking and luck.

Yes.

Quote from: Benoist;651219Look at pages 107 and 109 of your AD&D 1st ed player's handbook. The advice for Successful Adventures ...

... is one of the most widely available indications of what the underworld portion of old-style D&D campaigns is like. People with little else will have to "reverse engineer" from the advice to the context.

Quote from: Phillip;651226... is one of the most widely available indications of what the underworld portion of old-style D&D campaigns is like. People with little else will have to "reverse engineer" from the advice to the context.

And actually read the Dungeon Master's Guide. Not just use the tables and appendices here and there. Yes.

Quote from: Benoist;651219Vacuums in the dungeon are usually refilled by other monsters, not to mention, if you include factions and the like, the dynamic in the dungeon is going to change over time ... Think of it as a dynamic place. Not a still picture "on pause" while the PCs are away.

The need for the dungeonmaster to think through and contrive all this comes from atrophy in campaign scope, in terms of number and activity of players.

In the early heyday, there was not just one little, joined at the hip group of characters in the campaign. For that matter, players could have monsters as characters.

Player initiative took care of a lot of stuff quite naturally!

Quote from: Phillip;651230The need for the dungeonmaster to think through and contrive all this comes from atrophy in campaign scope, in terms of number and activity of players.

In the early heyday, there was not just one little, joined at the hip group of characters in the campaign. For that matter, players could have monsters as characters.

Player initiative took care of a lot of stuff quite naturally!

True. Thing is, you don't have to have 12 players at your table three different times a week to enjoy that kind of organic development. Introduce an open game table policy (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/1223/roleplaying-games/opening-your-game-table) to your games, and you'll see very similar results unfold, no matter the size of your groups from one day to the next.

Quote from: The Butcher;651216Not really. Misery Tourism is defined by the lack of a fighting chance. Players in Fantasy Fucking Vietnam, like soldiers in the eponymous war, have the odds stacked up against them, forcing them to wise up to the dangers of the dungeon. But a proper old school dungeon crawl isn't unbeatable. Even the infamous Tomb of Horrors, which Gygax created to best his cleverest players (Ernie Gygax and Rob Kuntz) was "defeated" by a combination of tactical thinking and luck.

Minor nitpick.  Gary said he created Tomb of Horrors not for his cleverest players, but as an answer to those unnamed players at cons who bragged they could beat any adventure.

Now that we've got the figurative meaning of "Fantasy Viet Nam" out of the way, I think the idea of a campaign set in a parallel fantasy universe, where the PCs are in a Viet Nam like country, drafted as special forces or whatever, to fight the inhuman hordes.

Toss in a tunnel network so that the "monsters" can pop up most anywhere, abusive "charm person" abilities so that traitors and informants are common, desperate men-at-arms engaging in every more bizarre/draconian behavior to "win" the unwinnable war...just seems like there's a real campaign there.

Or a nightmare. Whatever.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;651233Minor nitpick.  Gary said he created Tomb of Horrors not for his cleverest players, but as an answer to those unnamed players at cons who bragged they could beat any adventure.

Tomb of Horrors, as far as I know from talking to Rob and Ernie, was actually specifically created to fuck with Rob Kuntz, because Rob was very clever, knew Gary's usual tactics, and all things considered was an amazing player with an amazing memory, the kind of memory that allowed him to memorize the maps of each level and never draw them, which basically made Gary's efforts at confusion all the harder. Rob is actually the only player who made it through (just like he was the first player to make it to the bottom of Castle Greyhawk and find the Slide to China there), basically sacrificing his orc army and using his uber-orc henchman whose name I don't remember right off the bat to trigger the traps, poke at stuff and so on until he finally made it to the end (there was a magical flying carpet involved too, that I remember. I know the orc henchman was basically using it and ended up making a hole into it to wear it as a poncho, then there were rolls whenever they would do stuff with the carpet to see if stuff fell through and the like LOL). Anyway. Ernie did go through the Tomb of Horrors as well, but basically backed off once he hit valuable treasure, instead of pushing on to the end (a valid tactic in and of itself).

Quote from: Benoist;651232True. Thing is, you don't have to have 12 players at your table three different times a week to enjoy that kind of organic development. Introduce an open game table policy (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/1223/roleplaying-games/opening-your-game-table) to your games, and you'll see very similar results unfold, no matter the size of your groups from one day to the next.

Yes, it is the total traffic that most matters. Also, as Alexander has rediscovered, the basic setup of underworld, wilderness and town is very well suited to being a game you can just pull out and play at any time.

(At some point, the time horizons for active players will get too out of sync if you give some too much game time per real time.)

I'll have to find it, but I swear I just read a dragon magazine where he answered it and said it was for know it all players at a con.  I don't suppose it matters in the grand scale though.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;651241I'll have to find it, but I swear I just read a dragon magazine where he answered it and said it was for know it all players at a con.  I don't suppose it matters in the grand scale though.

Well if he words it that way in The Dragon it's actually not contradicting what I know. That is, the Tomb of Horrors first came up in Gary's campaign to fuck with Rob and so on, but then later it was revised and actually published as the module we know, which Gary could have described as "a module specifically designed for know it all players at Cons" or some such.

Know it all players in the official D&D tournament at the very first Origins convention, wasn't it?

Quote from: Doom;651237Now that we've got the figurative meaning of "Fantasy Viet Nam" out of the way, I think the idea of a campaign set in a parallel fantasy universe, where the PCs are in a Viet Nam like country, drafted as special forces or whatever, to fight the inhuman hordes.

Toss in a tunnel network so that the "monsters" can pop up most anywhere, abusive "charm person" abilities so that traitors and informants are common, desperate men-at-arms engaging in every more bizarre/draconian behavior to "win" the unwinnable war...just seems like there's a real campaign there.

The Black Company series of books is more or less like this. Or it could be a description of the thirty years war in Europe.

Quote from: Phillip;651254Know it all players in the official D&D tournament at the very first Origins convention, wasn't it?

That's where the published module made its debut so that's probably it.

Edit. Here's what it says on Wikipedia about the origins of the module: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_of_Horrors#Publication_history)

QuoteTomb of Horrors was written by Gary Gygax for official D&D tournament play at the 1975 Origins 1 convention.[3][5][6] Gygax developed the adventure from an idea by Alan Lucien, one of his original AD&D playtesters, "and I admit to chuckling evilly as I did so."[7] Gygax designed the Tomb of Horrors modules for two related purposes. First, Gygax explains, "There were several very expert players in my campaign, and this was meant as yet another challenge to their skill—and the persistence of their theretofore-invincible characters. Specifically, I had in mind foiling Rob Kuntz's PC, Robilar, and Ernie Gygax's PC, Tenser." Second, so that he was "ready for those fans [players] who boasted of having mighty PCs able to best any challenge offered by the AD&D game."[8]

So it looks like we're right, Sacrosanct. Neither of us got it "wrong". It's both, in fact.

Quote from: Benoist;651357So it looks like we're right, Sacrosanct. Neither of us got it "wrong". It's both, in fact.

We're both right.  I'm cool with that ;)

(http://orcstain.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/orcstain007-02.jpg?w=640)

Orc Stain, fantasy Vietnam.

Quote from: gleichman;651109The more I read, the more it sounds like a primitive version of Torchbearer.

I see what you did there.