Dungeons and Dragons - Any one here play

Post Reply New Topic

I played 1st edition when I was a teenager, then I quit. but when 5th edition came out I decided to give it a try and I really enjoy it.

I would like to hear from anyone who likes to play.

Do you prefer the talking/role playing part or the strategy/combat part? I prefer combat, but I also prefer that a combat not take forever. I would rather do 2-3 combats in a 2 hour session vs 1 combat and a lot of roleplaying.

For me DND is an outlet. I hate talking to people and trying to figure out interpersonal puzzles. That is the worst part of my life as an Aspy. I know some people will say that it helps develop tools and skills important for an Aspy, but that is not why I play.

Do you like metagaming or do you think it detracts from play? I like it to the extent that it helps my character to thrive and survive. But early on I realized that if I wanted to become the biggest baddest character in the group it was going to quickly become a peeing match. So I try to be effective and consistent without actually maxing out everything I could.

What are your thoughts, your style of play?

I've enjoyed AD&D and many similar TTRPGs since the early 1980s.

I like playing ordinary, average characters without any embellishments; relying instead on my own abilities to gather in-game information, weigh the odds, and plan my character's actions accordingly. Human Fighters, Thieves, and Fighter/Thieves were my favorite race-class combinations. Both role-playing and strategic combat are fun for me.

Currently, my interests are more toward science-fiction TTRPGs - Traveller, in particular. There is really not much difference. Holograms replace ghosts, robots replace zombies, and any sufficiently advanced technology is magic to those who don't understand it. The only major difference is the amount of power one can wield. Casting a six-die fireball at an opponent is one thing, but directing the exhaust of a fusion rocket at an entire city is quite another.

I was exposed to traveller back in the 80s when I was playing DND. I liked it a lot. As a matter of fact I bought the traveller playtest rules off of drive thru RPG recently.

I wish I knew someone here in my area playing traveller, but then again I am kind of maxed out in my playing time right now. I play DND encounters Wed night, I play a game called tunnels and trolls on every other thursday night, and I am going to start playing in a monthly game of DND on Saturdays. I DMD a DND game for a while, but my kids and a friend and his son and another friend were the players. the other dad is working out of town now, but his kid keeps asking when we are going to play. The other adult is too busy. Hard to find players some time.

If you ever want to try tunnels and Trolls it is easy. They have free rules at Drive thru and they have lost of free solo adventures

It certainly is hard to find players; harder still to find players that do not expect to play in a table-top version of their favorite video game or movie franchise.

When I DM'ed an AD&D game, every time a new fantasy-based movie came out, there was always a player who wanted to play a character that was exactly like their favorite character from the movie. Whenever I referee a Traveller game, there is always at least one player who wants their character to have a light-saber, a phaser, or a psionic ability that mimics everything from the Force to the Vulcan neck-pinch!

Others expected to find power-ups, ammo cases, treasure chests, and secret doors behind every monster and NPC encounter. They could not comprehend that it actually took time to get from point A to point B, and that there were no "spawning points" anywhere in my games.

In Traveller, if your character is reduced to zero points in strength, dexterity, and endurance, it is irrevocably dead, with no chance of reincarnation or resurrection. Healing from a near-mortal wound takes days in a medical center with doctors in constant attendance. With an average of only 21 "hit points" per character, a direct hit with the blast from a PGMP-15 could be instantly fatal to an un-armored character; so in Traveller, discretion really is the better part of valor!

When I first started in my teens, we played AD&D 2nd Ed., and then as soon as I started getting the hang of thAC0, 3rd edition came out and everyone switched over.

I don't really like 3rd anymore, but most of my friends insist on it. I don't really know how to describe it, just somehow it doesn't seem to have any "magic" in it. All of the weirdo rules that nobody used that used to be optional are now mandatory, and everyone follows them now...and the excitement of the unknown is gone, instead every player is pouring over the PHB trying to figure out the best way to max out their stats. Maybe that's just me?

I've been trying to run Basic, ran a couple good games, but I don't really have enough free time to be a DM. It's funny to watch everyone who's used to 3rd try to play it and get stomped. I feel like I need to ween them out of bad habits and teach them that not every encounter is a violent battle to the death.

I bought 5th edition off eBay, and I really like a lot of the rules (especially how your stats dictate what weapons you're able to use), but haven't had a chance to run it. I think I'd be more apt to run it if I was more into creating my own adventures, but I don't have enough time or imagination for that, so I really like that D&D has tons of adventures/story/lore/etc. already cooked up.

Solo play is pretty cool though, I really liked Fighting Fantasy back in the day.

I am glad someone else plays it.

I went to Gencon this year (my second time, first was in Kenosha Wisconsin several years ago) and I got to play in a game run by one of the founding fathers of the game. He actually put together a special game for me and one other guy who did not get in on his scheduled games.

I am starting a new DND game Saturday. I am going to play a Wizard for the first time.
I have used the name Asperagus Joe previously as a subtle clue to my Aspergers.

I am thinking about the name Alfred Samual Berger which could be looked at a couple of ways - A. S. Berger or Sam Berger.

D&D has always been important to me. The video games and 4th edition were terrible but what those don't do is what makes it great; you make it your own. We usually made it a Lady Hawke, Indian Jones, Dragon Heart sort of thing instead of Final Fantasy "get the next cool thing" attitude. As for finding players, comic shops, facebook, Craigslist, and college campuses are good places to post an ad.

Yup, I'm a D&D 5th edition player. I started going to the local D&D Encounters game on Wednesdays recently in order to have something to do outside of the house. I'm really enjoying it so far though I haven't had a chance to play with many of the same people from week to week yet.

What got me into D&D was the AD&D 2nd Ed. Paladin's Handbook. A wonderful book with amazing art that drew me in and cemented my love of tabletop RPGs. My biggest passion tabletop-wise though will always be the White Wolf games, I just love the moral and social aspects that are front and center of those games.

Hey man, some of the videogames were pretty good! Obviously not as much freedom as the real thing, but I'd hardly say "terrible"...I mean, besides the handful that were bad...



Oh yeah, I've always loved the beautiful line art in the old D&D books (though the early stuff was pretty crude). B/E, BECMI, and 2nd Ed had some great stuff, just dripping with that weird early 80s fantasy vibe. Erol Otus's stuff was especially weird and wonderful, especially his color illustrations.

Honestly I think a lot of people didn't understand what 4th Ed was trying to accomplish in part because so many people were in denial about 3rd Ed. 3rd Ed shot itself in the head several times over the course of its life what with the insane focus on prestige classes, the whole CoDzilla nonsense, and the utter domination of wizards in regards to almost everything as well as completely marginalizing many of the physical classes such as fighter. 4th Ed tried to rectify some of that by giving everyone combat skills to use and tried to get away from the three prestige class pileup that 3rd was prone to. That said 4th did do some pretty facepalm worthy things such as the massive brain fart that was ritual spellcasting. Fortunately 5th Ed has managed to find something of a middle ground between the previous editions. Fighters are no longer rocks with HP at higher levels, wizards are powerful again, and sorcerers are no longer gimped wizards on their own.

I only got to play 4th one time, it was the starter kit, and I had no idea what was going on.

I also have the Gamma World which is based on 4th, and it is equally weird (but also very "OD&D, make up your own rules"), but I am actually missing the deck of cards.

I appriciate what 4th ed tried to do, but they failed in doing so; at-will/the encounter/daily power system was too video-gamey.
5th edition is what 4th should/could have been.

I quite enjoy playing 5th edition for its simple-to-start rules, without giving up depth once you get into the system; but i still strongly prefer pathfinder (a streamlined 3.5th ed). Infinite customisability is a good thing in my book, but it is admittedly hard to get started becouse of that

I still think 2nd edition was the best, even if there were a bazillion or so supplemental rules books. At least there was the option of ignoring those supplements, playing by only the core rules, and having just as much fun.

This was also the time when TSR owned the game and Dragon Magazine, so there was at least some actual gamer involvement in developing the game. Now it's just a faceless corporation telling the players how they are supposed to have fun.

Also, Zeb Cook really knows how to put a rulebook together. As much as I enjoy reading Gary's un-edited texts in the White Box and 1st Ed, I always turn to 2nd Ed for rules that need clarity.

Though I do wonder what Gary's 2nd Ed would've been like.

I really want to run some D&D now =| Maybe I could wing a game of Castle of the Mad Archmage, I don't imagine it would require too much preparation...

2nd Ed really did have a lot of good ideas but I often found it bogged down by the crazy math of things like THAC0 and the Fighter's asinine extra attack progression. One of the few things 3rd Ed did right was nix both and replace them with systems that made sense. I still to this day however consider the Vancian spell system to be one of the dumbest and most rigid spell systems in the history of tabletop. Then again I've immersed myself in the utter magical insanity that is Mage: The Ascension so .

If THAC0 is the worst of it, then it's not all that bad. It's the original psionics rules that didn't quite fit. Using them was like putting antlers on a dog - it looks cute, but it just doesn't work. Then the Complete Psionicist rule book came out, and suddenly everyone wanted to play a "Mind Mage".