Author Topic: Gary Gygax Interview  (Read 1776 times)

Bahgoon

  • Sol
  • Posts: 946
Gary Gygax Interview
« on: August 17, 2004, 05:03:55 AM »
Gamespy is running a 30th anniversary retrospective on D&D this week (pop-up blockers being very usefull). One of the articles is an interview with E. Gary Gygax. I found the following Q/A rather interesting.

GameSpy: Have you had a chance to play or even look at some of the current Dungeons & Dragons games?

Gygax: I've looked at them, yes, but I'm not really a fan. The new D&D is too rule intensive. It's relegated the Dungeon Master to being an entertainer rather than master of the game. It's done away with the archetypes, focused on nothing but combat and character power, lost the group cooperative aspect, bastardized the class-based system, and resembles a comic-book superheroes game more than a fantasy RPG where a player can play any alignment desired, not just lawful good. Now, should I tell you what I really think?

That is pretty close to my first impression of 3rd Edition Rules and NWN so far.

Discuss. . . .
Bahgoon

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.

Reigns

  • Parsley Boy
  • Lem
  • Posts: 5062
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2004, 06:17:08 AM »
Gygax is amusing
I'm not a D&D fan, but from what I have heard I think he's right
Maybe ol' Gary can have Gord do something unpleasant to the new rules system...
 :lol:
Reigns

SBNVL  = Snicker, But Not Very Loudly
(Gravity is a myth, the Earth sucks.)

GO STEELERS!!!  Let's Go Pens!!!

Bahgoon

  • Sol
  • Posts: 946
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2004, 06:42:48 AM »
I've been playing AD&D since 1979, so I guess I'm 'old school' on these points. I will just say that so far I am not falling in love with the new 3rd Edition ruleset.

Parenthetical note (note):
Gygax is one of my 'brushes with greatness'. He was sitting by himself at a table in the snackbar area of an early Gencon ('80 or '81 I think) and I started talking to him. We ended up drinking beer and eating pizza and discussing geeky things for the next couple of hours. He was a cool guy.
Bahgoon

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.

SirWarkof

  • Ko
  • Posts: 3180
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2004, 06:57:38 AM »
I have reached the conclusion that the interviewer was a piece of wood.

Obviously, as there was no discussion of Elf Paladin sex, there's no living human behind those questions.

Come to think of it, even a dead human would have raised the subject.

Louie

  • Ort
  • Posts: 464
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2004, 07:01:27 AM »
Quote from: "Bahgoon"
I've been playing AD&D since 1979, so I guess I'm 'old school' on these points. I will just say that so far I am not falling in love with the new 3rd Edition ruleset.

Parenthetical note (note):
Gygax is one of my 'brushes with greatness'. He was sitting by himself at a table in the snackbar area of an early Gencon ('80 or '81 I think) and I started talking to him. We ended up drinking beer and eating pizza and discussing geeky things for the next couple of hours. He was a cool guy.


So did you end up discussing Elf Paladin sex?  Or are you also a piece of wood?

Also, is it Elf Paladin sex, or Elvish Paladin sex, or Elven Paladin sex?

I'm also old school, it took me a while to adjust to the second addition rules (what does THAC0 mean?).

Louie

Pixelated

  • Discombobulated Pixie
  • Jah
  • Posts: 20249
  • Looking for a recombobulation area
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2004, 07:05:55 AM »
Quote from: "Bahgoon"
I've been playing AD&D since 1979, so I guess I'm 'old school' on these points. I will just say that so far I am not falling in love with the new 3rd Edition ruleset.


Yep. What he said. Except that I started in 1978. :P

Gygax summed it up nicely though, especially the bit about the bastardization of the class system and loss of the archetypes.

I was also amused to see his comment about how he never should have included psionics. I heartily agree - any campaign I ever ran had a complete and total ban on psionics, because plain and simple... they suck.


Aim low. Less chance of disappointment. More chance of a nutshot.

If you don't have idiot friends, it's possible you are the idiot friend.

Bahgoon

  • Sol
  • Posts: 946
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2004, 08:12:09 AM »
Quote from: "Louie"
So did you end up discussing Elf Paladin sex?  Or are you also a piece of wood?

Also, is it Elf Paladin sex, or Elvish Paladin sex, or Elven Paladin sex?

I'm also old school, it took me a while to adjust to the second addition rules (what does THAC0 mean?).

Louie

Tsk. If you were old school you would know that only Lawful Good humans could be paladins, so the elvish paladin sex point would be moot. Unless you were talking about a paladin having sex with an elf. Hmmmm . . .

 :D

THAC0 is part of the arcane symbology, the meaning of which is only revealed to those who have been initiated.  :P
Bahgoon

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.

Greybeard

  • Amn
  • Posts: 726
  • shut-in
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2004, 08:38:25 AM »
THACO Means To Hit Armor Class Zero meaning the highest armor class in the old rules before 3.5 am I correct and do I win a prize?:)

In this months PC Gamer there is a big anniversary edition with D@D, interviews and traces the history of D@D and all the games made using their rules, very interesting.

Since I know little I will say that at least now, higher class number armor means MORE protection not less, like it used to be, which never made sense to me.

Games like IWD, BG 1@2 etc.

GB
Now playing-NWN

Dream like you'll live forever, live like you'll die today.-James Dean

Bahgoon

  • Sol
  • Posts: 946
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2004, 08:54:34 AM »
Quote from: "Greybeard"
THACO Means To Hit Armor Class Zero meaning the highest armor class in the old rules before 3.5 am I correct and do I win a prize?:)

GB

Close but no kewpie doll, good sir. That does mean, 'to hit armor class 0', but AC0 was far from the highest AC. IIRC (and it has been a few years) AC10 was the armor class for a human with no armor on and the numbers went down as you added different types of armor. I have run into critters with ACs in the -10 to -15 range, though. Basically you would modify your 'to hit' roll by the difference between AC0 and the target's actual AC value to see if you actually walloped him or not. A natural 20 roll is always a hit.  :D
Bahgoon

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.

Pixelated

  • Discombobulated Pixie
  • Jah
  • Posts: 20249
  • Looking for a recombobulation area
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2004, 09:37:39 AM »
Quote from: "Bahgoon"
Quote from: "Greybeard"
THACO Means To Hit Armor Class Zero meaning the highest armor class in the old rules before 3.5 am I correct and do I win a prize?:)

GB

Close but no kewpie doll, good sir. That does mean, 'to hit armor class 0', but AC0 was far from the highest AC. IIRC (and it has been a few years) AC10 was the armor class for a human with no armor on and the numbers went down as you added different types of armor. I have run into critters with ACs in the -10 to -15 range, though. Basically you would modify your 'to hit' roll by the difference between AC0 and the target's actual AC value to see if you actually walloped him or not. A natural 20 roll is always a hit.  :D


In 1st Ed., -10 was as low as you could go. Nothing counted past that point.

1st Ed armor chart:

AC 10 = unarmored
AC 9 = shield only
AC 8 = leather or padded
AC 7 = studded leather or leather/padded & shield
AC 6 = scale mail or studded & shield
AC 5 = chain mail or scale & shield
AC 4 = banded or splint mail or chain & shield
AC 3 = platemail or banded/splint & shield
AC 2 = plate & shield

No armor by itself gave better than AC 2 (until Unearthed Arcana offered Field (AC 2) and Full Plate (AC 1) armors c.1982).


I can't believe I remember that. Ugh. *runs out to get a life*


Aim low. Less chance of disappointment. More chance of a nutshot.

If you don't have idiot friends, it's possible you are the idiot friend.

Bahgoon

  • Sol
  • Posts: 946
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #10 on: August 17, 2004, 10:43:12 AM »
Quote from: "Luchaire"
In 1st Ed., -10 was as low as you could go. Nothing counted past that point.

1st Ed armor chart:

AC 10 = unarmored
AC 9 = shield only
AC 8 = leather or padded
AC 7 = studded leather or leather/padded & shield
AC 6 = scale mail or studded & shield
AC 5 = chain mail or scale & shield
AC 4 = banded or splint mail or chain & shield
AC 3 = platemail or banded/splint & shield
AC 2 = plate & shield

No armor by itself gave better than AC 2 (until Unearthed Arcana offered Field (AC 2) and Full Plate (AC 1) armors c.1982).


I can't believe I remember that. Ugh. *runs out to get a life*

*bows to the master*

I'm sure you DM'd alot more than me. I was lucky enough to play with a dude who liked to DM and was good at it.

You forget though about the guys playing with the Monty Haul DM's that had +5 plate and a +5 shield (usually a pally with a +4 Holy Avenger) @ level 5.   :wink:
Bahgoon

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.

Louie

  • Ort
  • Posts: 464
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #11 on: August 17, 2004, 10:57:02 AM »
My Thac0 question was kind of rhetorical, in that I already knew what it meant.

When I started, it was 1st edition.  Big tables telling what you needed to roll in order to hit, and yes, -10 was the best AC you could hope to get, and 2 was the best with armor (as per Luchaire's table).

I had pretty much quit playing by the time 2nd edition was popular, and so Thac0 was still a relatively new term to me.

Just for kicks, I went and found what the collectors value of my original basic D&D box was.  $125 in mint condition.

I got much more than $125 of fun out of it, so I'm glad I played rather than saved it.

Bahg - Most of what forced me to quit was the monty haul DM concept.  My brother played with a group who always started out at level 10, and gave themselves a bunch of magic items before they even started out.

Louie

Drozz

  • Court Jester
  • Fal
  • Posts: 4347
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #12 on: August 17, 2004, 02:14:25 PM »
Wow, Gygax is still around, huh?  How old is that dude?
Official Member of the Hole in the Head Gang
Drozz, Jbbto, Michelle and Daveinthebasement

It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish - Mother Theresa

Bahgoon

  • Sol
  • Posts: 946
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #13 on: August 17, 2004, 02:55:19 PM »
Quote from: "Drozz"
Wow, Gygax is still around, huh?  How old is that dude?

Born in 1938, I think the article said. Had a stroke not too long ago but seems to be recovering.
Bahgoon

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.

Lego

  • Windows Fanboy
  • Disciple of Freddie
  • Vex
  • Posts: 10824
  • Me show HIM some trick or two
Gary Gygax Interview
« Reply #14 on: August 17, 2004, 04:14:38 PM »
I get over my (very many reservations) by completely ignoring the fact that  3+ rules are DnD. Oh sure, they may SAY DnD, but I could paint a piano box red, write Ferrari on it. But that doesn't make it a Ferrari.

My love for classic ADnD is unending. I still have an era 1978 Basic Rules DnD boxed set in my closet, complete with the paper peices to use as dice, still uncut  :shock:

I think the 3+ rules work fairly well in a game environment (albiet there IS alot of room for improvement), but it isn't DnD. It just isn't.  :cry: