Skyrock
t. Sgeyerog :DDDDD
- Registriert
- 10. September 2003
- Beiträge
- 13.448
Via theRPGsite ein Spielbericht von Mike Mearls zu OD&D: Original D&D Discussion - Kardallin's Palace, Session 1, 2/15/08
Natürlich ist der Threadtitel zugespitzt, aber auf Nachfrage macht Mearls interessante Vergleiche mit 4E.
Relevante Ausschnitte:
The thing I like best about OD&D monsters is that they are simple to run and easy to improvise. It was nice to simply write down AC, damage, and hit dice. On the other hand, I missed the variety of weird effects and tactics that 4e monsters can use independent of any work I put into them as a DM. The two approaches are very different.
OD&D and D&D 4 are such different games that they cater to very different needs. For me, in OD&D things are fast, loose, and improvised. I can write rules without worrying about strict interpretations or covering every possible case. The players, since they've agreed to sit down at an OD&D table, are probably more likely to accept random craziness and a game that requires a bit more deductive reasoning (I disable a trap by wedging an iron spike into the lever that activates it) as opposed to D&D 4 (I disable a trap by finding the lever then making a skill check).
To be honest, I think the games are different enough that I easily have space for both of them in my library. For me, they fill very different needs. OD&D is like jamming with a band. A lot of stuff gets made up on the fly, and when we find something interesting everyone just rides with it. D&D 4 is like playing a symphony. There's more structure and more pieces to work with, but everything comes together in this grand ensemble.
Natürlich ist der Threadtitel zugespitzt, aber auf Nachfrage macht Mearls interessante Vergleiche mit 4E.
Relevante Ausschnitte:
The thing I like best about OD&D monsters is that they are simple to run and easy to improvise. It was nice to simply write down AC, damage, and hit dice. On the other hand, I missed the variety of weird effects and tactics that 4e monsters can use independent of any work I put into them as a DM. The two approaches are very different.
OD&D and D&D 4 are such different games that they cater to very different needs. For me, in OD&D things are fast, loose, and improvised. I can write rules without worrying about strict interpretations or covering every possible case. The players, since they've agreed to sit down at an OD&D table, are probably more likely to accept random craziness and a game that requires a bit more deductive reasoning (I disable a trap by wedging an iron spike into the lever that activates it) as opposed to D&D 4 (I disable a trap by finding the lever then making a skill check).
---
und
---
und
---
To be honest, I think the games are different enough that I easily have space for both of them in my library. For me, they fill very different needs. OD&D is like jamming with a band. A lot of stuff gets made up on the fly, and when we find something interesting everyone just rides with it. D&D 4 is like playing a symphony. There's more structure and more pieces to work with, but everything comes together in this grand ensemble.
