They had trouble with simultaneous releases when they put out 4e, there were some troublesome proofreading/quality issues. So with 5e, they put out the pieces one at a time, allowing each title to have its own turn to be the urgent, top priority.
I started running 5e before the release of the Monster Manual 5e, using the smattering of monsters in the back of the PH. It was limiting, but fun in its way.
Yes, and Noon to 3:00 PM can blow a hole in your free time in a way that something running 7:00-10:00 PM doesn’t.
I put about 6-10 hours a week into RPG’s (DM’ing/playing/prepping) but would never want to play every Saturday afternoon. That would totally crimp my other interests.
Just want to point out Gygax had 2 sons, who are quite different people. I believe you are referring to Ernie Gygax.
Luke Gygax, by all accounts I’ve heard, is a great fellow.
Gygax also elevated Jean Wells in the company before the subsequent management basically made her a secretary. Wells had a decent working relationship with Gygax, which you can see if you read in Dragon magazine “Sage Advice” column from the mid 80’s. Gygax should have listened to Wells more often than he did, but he did try to empower her to make the game more friendly to women.
Still, his legacy towards women in gaming is mixed at best. In the 80’s, TSR games which Gygax was less involved in tended to do better with women, notably Star Frontiers, but also “Basic D&D” which did not include rules making it disadvantageous to play a female character, unlike Gygax’s Advanced Dungeons and Dragons, which capped female strength below male strength for each race. And I think telling a new D&D player their character would be a lousy fighter is pretty rough.
Yes, there was a pattern in Gygax’s creations of evil female power that went beyond the dragon example. Most notably drow were the only evil elves, and the only matriarchal (he would have said “female dominated”) ones. This pattern wasn’t his invention — it’s as old as Snow White, Cinderella, and the rest — but even in his own time, others (for example, Tom Moldvay) created more inclusive games.
If your character concept is “complete” before choosing your class, consider being a human. Other choices carry along more “baggage” that may distract from what you’re shooting for.
Other players can be like “What kind of elf would…?” etc., but they don’t do that for humans.
While my players will easily kill 30 minutes collaborating on what to buy, a session like this is definitely more fun if there are NPC’s involved.
We had a memorable session when the PC’s found the Emporium of Evil, where they tried to find the magic items that weren’t TOO cursed, speaking to all manner of morally questionable merchant. (They bought a lot, actually.)
You can also brainstorm the next quest this way. Whether or not the party wants to take a quest from a one of these merchants, they can certainly hear rumors. You can see what they take interest in, and build your next plot arc off of that base.
Some trouble can always pop up when the shopping is winding down, requiring decisive action by the party.
Yes, I play a higher-level wizard who is always running out of spell slots by the end of the dungeon, casting wimpy cantrips and hiding behind the martials. As nature intended.
It’s all about the DM saying no to long-resting whenever and wherever. It may seem like common sense that the players should be able to say when the party should rest. But the game doesn’t work, especially at high levels, unless the DM controls and limits them.
Fair points. I’m a walking rules encyclopedia type, and I’ve been in a number of games where I was like, “What the hell am I supposed to be doing?” And not having any fun.
On the other hand, I’ve brought “D&D only” people along for the ride on other games with good success. The trick is running a good “tutorial level” introductory adventure, where nobody is either bored or frustrated. That’s going to involve introducing the mechanics in digestible bites.
Funny thing about a D&D only mindset is that there are games that are much simpler, where thinking tactically is much less important.
Most folks never did need the books to learn to play. You’ve always been able to learn D&D by somebody (usually their DM) explaining it. But many people end up buying books and things once they’re engaged.
Like any hobby, people spend money on it when they want to. Those solid modules and supplements you mention would be a bit part of that, but also how people feel about the company they’d be supporting matters a lot (this is the so-called “reflective reaction” Don Norman writes about in his book Emotional Design) .
I think most of my correct guesses were based on the artwork.
In an OSR game, you only fight when you have to, because victory is not a foregone conclusion.
You might also “roll up” your character instead of creating one. Which everyone should at some point, because it’s a whole part of the game that’s disappeared. If you hate trying to come up with a character concept, you might well love a game where the dice can give you some ideas.
Most modern OSR games will tell you that characters have no “plot armor” and are just as vulnerable as NPC’s, just like they were in the old days. But read the rules, and the PC’s actually do have some plot armor after all, just a bit less.