As to the gazillion rules, it is true there are rules aplenty, bu, like in most cases, you work perfectly wiht only 5%. Seen an American Football or Baseball rulebook? They’re the size of the bible…still, when you play baseball you use only 10 rules most of the time.
As to women’s large breasts, although true in most drawings (and of course those armours must give you AC 9, even if Full Plate, just look at the cleavage and legs) most female characters tend to be, at most, C cup.
Dont forget about Terry Pratchitt, the author of the DiscWorld series. He said that most of his book ideas came from gaming.
You know, for the world’s smartest human being, Cecil sometimes seems to have an awful low Wisdom score…
ROTFLMAO!!!
Thanks, I needed a good laugh!
Which he would accurately (in most cases) assume is as exciting as WATCHING somebody do their taxes. :)**
Which is why a good DM can make all the difference.**
Perhaps you never told him before. You are obviously an exceptional DM.
No argument here that the column is 20 years out of date; I also do not contest that it fails to capture the spirit of why people do play the game. (I admit I would write a horrible column on the appeal of, say, hockey.) However, Cecil is certainly accurate because it is a combination of his impression of the game and citations of a few rules that he saw therein.
Did Cecil receive a full and accurate representation of D&D? Probably not, but he’s not a reporter, out to cover all angles of the story and present us a neat packaged article that we can file into a Rolodex. He’s a columnist. Would you expect Dave Barry or James Kilpatrick or Miss Manners to leave out their personal opinions and present easily digestible, homogenized, indisputable facts for the masses? No: save that for the people at Encarta.
Of course the basic premise of D&D has spawned a number of more-palatable spinoffs. So has chess, for goodness’ sake. Of course the multi-billion dollar videogame industry and the slightly-less-but-still-multi-billion-dollar movie industry have occasionally used material that crosses over with RPG fans (eg, Lord of the Rings, D&D, Reign of Fire, et al). But whereas my mother will go see Lord of the Rings and even read the books, she doesn’t play pen-n-paper D&D. See, the thing is, the movies aren’t roleplaying, they’re just based on it. The fantasy-medieval-swords-n-death material isn’t the geeky part. It’s the sitting-around-drinking-Coke-and-eating-chips-and-pretending-to-be-outside that makes it geeky.
Leave the billion-dollar video games out of this; D&D is basically playing Morrowind at 33 [sup]1[/sup]/[sub]3[/sub] instead of at 78 and where you do all the calculations yourself, using a ton of reference manuals and random number generators. Video games themselves are only slightly less geeky than the pen-n-paper games anyhow: my parents and grandparents wouldn’t play a video game, wouldn’t even know how. That seems a pretty good gold standard for geekdom to me. Also, pen-n-paper D&D doesn’t have a ton of celebrity spokespeople as do movies and video games. Also another blip on the Geek Radar.
Cecil calls the characters “anti-social cutthroats.” Well… you have to admit that the bulk of the rules is nothing more than a list of ways to kill things, a list of things to kill, a list of means to do so, and a list of reasons why. I can’t see anywhere that he has factually made any errors (based on the manuals available in 1980).
Update the column, please, Cecil. Revise the caustic wit to your own preference.
AH! But there is a crucial difference between a typical PC and an “anti-social cutthroat.”
That is that the typical PC is acting as a force for good (even though not all of their actions are completely altruistic) living and operating freely and openly within the community, and therefore cannot be truly deemed “anti-social.”
I really must take exception to the slanderous, character assasinating handling of double-entry bookkeeping! Comparing it to a trivial role-playing game, indeed! Sheesh!
What? 
I’m off to watch C-SPAN. I think there is a Pentagon briefing on… 
Do you know anything about roleplaying?
Cecil is using a 20 year old 1st manual. The game is now on its third edition.
He quoted an single example of a mathematical calculation as ‘the game being complicated’.
He apparently didn’t notice that this is the referees handbook (players don’t need to know any of this) and that the result of the calculation is given at the back of the manual (it was just an example to help referees understand).
The game requires players to have precisely one sheet of paper describing their character. Where do you get the idea it is more complicated than taxes?
I regularly teach my 11 year pupils how to start playing in 5 minutes.
So there are no complicated calculations, little paperwork and this is not a difficult game to play, but it is very interesting to imaginative people of all ages.
Cecil’s regurgitated 20 year old diatribe on a game he has never seen is about the same quality as describing modern computers as costing $100,000, filling an entire room and the user needing to know machine code to achieve anything. :wally
Actually, a 20 year old computer would be a 128K Apple IIe for $2500, or the very first Macintosh. Remember the “Big Brother” commercial?
Well, I also have played D&D in it’s various incarnations for over 23 years now. I have been both a Player Character and a Dungeon Master. I own 80% of all the rules books currently available from Wizards of the Coast (the current publisher of the D&D game) and a whole slew of books from other 3rd party publishers. In addition, I work as a professional land surveyor for a large engineering firm based in California, I have a well-behaved and socially balanced 8-year old son, and I am happily married (granted it is my 2nd wife, but we all make mistakes).
I make all of these points because the stereotype of a person who plays RPGs like D&D is one of a geeky, unbathed, unhealthy person who hides within dorm rooms or their parents basement.
Now, to my point. Cecil definitely missed the point of playing D&D in the first place. But he did cover most of the sentiment held by those who don’t play. The first versions of the game that came out were very difficult to understand. The rule books were quite daunting to read. But the essence of the game was basically “playing make-believe.”
When I was 8 or 9 it was much more fun to go outside with my friends and hit sticks together pretending we were having a sword fight. As I got older, the appeal of doing that was still there, but I quickly grew tired of the arguements that came up.
“Okay, I killed you.” “No you didn’t! You missed me.” “I did not! I stabbed you right in the heart!” “No way! You completely missed!” etc etc etc ad nauseum.
The game of D&D allowed my friends and I to continue to play these sword fights, but we had rules to determine if we actually hit or not. We could also pretend to fight dragons and trolls and other nefarious creatures. We could even use magic spells to harm our enemies and heal our allies.
And if I could understand the basics of the rules at 11 years old, I’m sure that if Cecil had either done a little more investigation or even asked someone who played could have understood what the basics of the game were.
As far as the article (and the obvious “update”) I think the reason that it seems to be so far off-base was that Cecil quoted rules that were a very minor or obscure part of the game. Very rarely would you need to calculate the XP value of a monster, there was a chart in the back of the book for standard values. It was also very rare to need to determine if a character caught a disease or not. However, it was a very regular occurence to determine if your weapon struck your enemy. And the calculation for that was very simple: Roll the 20-sided die and see if you equaled or exceeded a target number from a chart. Then, if you hit, you would determine the damage dealt based on rolling additional dice and adding them up. So 90% of the mathematice involved was very simple. Occasionally there was a tricky calculation to be done, but I was always very good at math anyway.
I think that Cecil did miss the point of the game because my friends and I have found it fun for over 2 decades. But it hasn’t changed my opinion on his columns and articles. Like anything else I read, I consider it with anything else I may know on the subject and make my own conclusion.
-Syd
>:)
First Edition?!
Dude, I can understand why you might not want to upgrade to 3rd Edition (what with it being practically a whole 'nother game and all), but at least upgrade to 2nd Edition!
In 1st Edition, all coins weigh a whopping 1/10 of a pound. Do you know how big a copper piece would have to be to weigh 1/10 of a pound? Even if we assume it’s the same diameter as a modern U.S. half dollar coin (30.6 mm), it would have to be 6.9 millimeters thick to weigh 1/10 of a pound! What kind of a nutball society mints copper coins that are over a quarter of an inch thick?!
And don’t even get me started on how the magic treasure tables can place full-blown Artifacts in a randomly-rolled treasure hoard, or the silly concept of “alignment languages.” :rolleyes:
Glee, although 1st and 2nd Edition D&D were truly enjoyable games, the D20 system is second only to Hero system in terms of ease of translating character concept into actual PCs, IMHO. This is especially true when you consider the non-WOTC products from companies like Malhavoc and Green Ronin.
Furthermore, its also a lot easier to learn and more streamlined to use than the previous editions.
Your players might find it much easier to get into the game if you upgrade to 3Ed or 3.5.
Still, I must concur with tracer-at least upgrade to 2Ed. While there are still errors in the game, it is still much more flexible than 1Ed, while still being more similar to 1Ed than 3Ed or 3.5Ed.
Glee, although 1st and 2nd Edition D&D were truly enjoyable games, the D20 system is second only to Hero system in terms of ease of translating character concept into actual PCs, IMHO. This is especially true when you consider the non-WOTC products from companies like Malhavoc and Green Ronin.
Furthermore, its also a lot easier to learn and more streamlined to use than the previous editions.
Your players might find it much easier to get into the game if you upgrade to 3Ed or 3.5.
Still, I must concur with Tracer-at least upgrade to 2Ed. While there are still some really bad errors in the game (and even the new system isn’t flawless), it is still much more flexible than 1Ed, while still being more similar to 1Ed than 3Ed or 3.5Ed, which would make transition a little easier.
BTW- Re: (Not so) small change-I know of a documentary that detailed at least one culture that used to used huge stone wheels as currency. It was on NOVA or Nat’l Geographic or some such.
Well let’s see how ‘accurate’ he is:
Full and accurate representation?
Cecil flicked through one manual. That was the total extent of his research. He’s undoubtedly never even spoken to any players.
Personal opinions?
I’m all for them.
Do you think the columnist should bother to do more than 5 minutes research before producing the savage remarks above?
In addition the column was responding to a reader’s question:
’What I would like know is the different types and rules of these games, and where I can learn more about them.'
Do you think Cecil did well in his answer?
Ah, geeky.
Yes, roleplaying is called ‘geeky’.
So is working hard at school.
Or reading.
Or doing maths.
Or being in the debating society.
Or playing chess.
In the past 24 years of roleplaying, my players have used 1 manual, and I use 2. (One of my groups bought a third for reference, but we don’t need it often.)
So 3 is a ‘ton’?
Gosh, how would you describe the number of books needed for college?
I don’t know Morrowind, but I assume it’s a computer game.
And that game includes player interaction, discussion and planning? Players make impassioned pleas to the computer?
Perhaps there’s more to roleplaying than you know.
Yes, having a group of friends sit round a table and chat is obviously anti-social and ‘cutthroat’. :rolleyes:
The players should instead be out on the streets mugging people to support a drug habit.
Here are some of the 1980 rule headings from the Player’s Manual, with examples:
Character Abilities
Intelligence includes … mnemonic ability, reasoning…
Wisdom is a composite for … enlightenment, judgement, wile, will power and (to a certain extent) intuitiveness…
Dexterity encompasses … hand-eye coordination,agiltiy, reflexes, precision, balance and speed of movement …
Charisma is the measure of … physical attractiveness, persuasiveness and personal magnetism…
Character Race Descriptions
Dwarves … typically dwell in hilly or mountainous regions. They are miners of great skill and can detect the following phenomenon:
Slope of passage; new construction; approxiamte depth
**Character languages
Money changing, Banks, loans and Jewelers
Basic Equipment and supplies cost
Hirelings**
Alchemist; Blacksmith; Teamster; Armorer; Valet; bearer; Engineer; Steward
You’ll notice how the players are introduced to an adult vocabulary and many historical concepts.
My pupils can relate roleplaying to their English, History and Economics classes.
Oh, but you claim that rules are mainly all about killing.
Cecil didn’t say much apart from a lot of unsupported insinuations.
So you agree with him, for example, that the referee is ‘vaguely Mansonesque’?
That will come as a surprise to the parents and teaching colleagues at my school.
Parents have told me over the years that my roleplaying group has
helped a dyslexic child tackle advanced reading material, because he found it so interesting
helped a shy child speak up for herself (because she could use her character to say things she was too nervous to)
helped an anti-social child learn to listen to others (because you can’t succeed in the game by yourself)
helped a child with low esteem (this pupil had been extensively teased at previous schools, and was about to drop out entirely. When the pupil was part of the team that won the National Schools Roleplaying competition, their confidence returned and they are now at University. The parent wrote to the Headmaster to thank me.)
I have many more examples.
Why do you back Cecil denigrating such a useful activity?
I feel a bit nervous talking to a ‘vaguely Mansonesque’ chap, who associates with ‘anti-social cutthroats’. (according to Cecil) :smack:
Yes, I know the 1st Edition coins are too thick. We changed that 23 years ago.
We have never used random tables to write dungeons. (The sort of people who do that use cheat codes in computer games!)
I explain alignments to my pupils by using soccer teams as an example. There are colour combinations, or nicknames / jargon that will identify your team (or aligment).
I have played all 3 editions, and taken the best of each. But long ago I achieved 7 years worth of material, which I can use over and over again with each successive generation of pupils.
‘You have just finished your initial training with your Guild. They have told you to explore a little, starting in the quiet countryside village of Hommlet.
You leave the forest and see a road into Hommlet. There are farm buildings off to the left and a church at the top of a hill…’
Cecil should play some Evercrack…
Being a twitching monkey ignorant of most of the D&D rules or concepts, I started playing MMORPGs just because… well, it looked fun. The knowledgable D&D fans will probably cringe or just laugh at my ignorance, but I had watched my ex playing it one day and thought, wow, this is like Mario 64 with no limits and I can look so much cooler than a little mustachio’d plumber. He allowed me to create a character. That was three and a half years ago…
What I’m getting at is, I, ashamedly, had gone into the whole scene with the same unfair stereotype many people give to D&D and it’s players. When my ex told me the whole game was based on D&D and pointed things out which proved his point, I remember lifting my well-manicured lily-white collegiate hands from the keyboard and squealing in horror: “Geeks?! I’m shmoozing with geeks?! Does this wash off? How dare you not tell me this!”
It’s sad, it can be based in ignorance, but in the end, being the reasonable if mildly melodramatic girl that I am, I began to research and take some interest in this addictive obsession that entered my life, and in turn, met some very wonderful and entertaining people. Sure, some of them are geeks with the classic fanny-packs, standing with their noses pressed against the closed store windows of shops with names like “The Sorcerer’s Stone” - but it’s just a matter of personal style. I’m sure one day I’ll meet an older lady dressed in orange and red carrying a terrier in her purse who tells me how much she loves D&D, and I will cherish the fanny pack. Cherish it.
What I’m saying is, basically, I agree that Cecil should really have given this topic more of a chance, do a little research - even playing something watered down like the MMORPGs available today that take all the real work out of the game could give him a new, more interesting perspective. It’s hard to love something you don’t understand. But once you do…
Lady Jinxx (49th level Dark Elf Rogue of EQ! And gtg!)
I agree that there was a lot of work understanding the 1st edition 20 plus years ago, and that many aspects of the game (e.g. proficiencies) have been improved.
But I have it down pat now (my main group produced a manual of 120 pages with extensions and clarifications!)
As I said, given my experience, it takes a pupil about 5 minutes to start roleplaying. Their character is filled out later, which does take 20-30 minutes.
BTW: Apologies for the double post- instead of the typical “Thank you” message, all I got was a “Waiting for Straight Dope…” message followed by an “Operation failed” message from my browser.
I can only say “NeverWinterNights” Probably should have at least a PIII with a good video card. And, surprise surprise, while it is Wizards of the Coast, and Hasbro, the ultimate publisher is… . … . …ATARI!
Great fun. One of the best done computer games in years.