I really appreciate you saying this! Thank you so much for taking the time to write a comment to let me know. It means a lot to me. Cheers, and happy gaming!
Wow! Great video Martin. Talking about the Complete Warlock, Balboa Game company, and the Warhouse really brought up some great memories as I practically grew up at the Warhouse since 1981 until it closed in 2022 with the passing of the owner and my good friend Steven Luckey. The early history of the game and its variations is important to the games legacy as well as its future. Thanks for taking the time to explain the gaming scene in California during those early days. 40+ years of my life with good friends and memories of playing the games we all love. Thank you. Looking forward to more videos from you.
Re: the addition of Agility: Dexterity was originally supposed to determine only accuracy with missiles and who got off the first shot. It was later broadened to include agility, but that was after the creation of these rules. DragonQuest (1980) also separated manual dexterity and agility.
FYI, the 1975 Warlock does not include Paladins, Rangers, or Triple or Quadruple Multi-Classes. It's limited to the following classes: Magic-Users, Clerics, Thieves, Fighting Men, Dwarves, Hobbits, Magical-Fighter Combination, Magical-Cleric Combination, Clerical-Fighter Combination and Elves. Essentially, the LBB classes (although it's definitely in the "Race as Class" camp) plus Thieves and Combinations of the three LBB classes. The "Combination" classes are meant for humans and each have their own level/experience tables.
Just wanted to thank you for your web site!! Absolutely wonderful!! I started playing OD&D in 1977 and bought Holmes Basic in 1978 (read the rules one Sunday from cover to cover). It was the first game that I ever GMed in 1978 (was always a player in OD&D). Fond memories of playing the Zenopus Tower adventure that was in that game!! btw: For people that many not know what LBBs are thought I'd include the definition. LBB is the acronym for Little Brown Books. They refer to the first three rule booklets of the OD&D rules.
I feel like I have at least heard of a lot of the things you have posted about before, but this was entirely novel and very interesting new information about the history of the hobby! Thank you so much for doing this research and sharing what you've found.
I appreciate that! I will also direct you to Zenopus Archives who researched a lot of this stuff years ago. They are so knowledgeable about the Holmes edition of Basic D&D (hence the "Zenopus" name of the blog which comes from the Tower of Zenopus in that edition). There's a chapter in a recently published book called "50 Years of Dungeons & Dragons" (finally got my copy yesterday!) that includes a lot of this info, written by Zenopus Archive and Tony Rowe. I haven't read the entire book yet, but their chapter is really good. zenopusarchives.blogspot.com/ mitpress.mit.edu/9780262547604/fifty-years-of-idungeons-and-dragonsi/
I really appreciate the nerdy scholarship you’re doing. I love the Caltech campus. Those turtles wander pretty far from the pond. In highschool, my friends and I would sneak into the steam tunnels. In the mid to late 2000s it was a relaxing place to take my dog and let him run around off leash. Anyway, I think Warlock was probably the least nerdy RPG thing that was played at Caltech. I used to play at a rpg store on Colorado (near the cross street of Michigan, I think), and occasional a Caltech student would drop in wanting us to play test something they came up with. They were systems that only an engineering student could love. 😂 Back when I played (approx 79-84) every game had “house rules”. I don’t think I’ve ever played in a by-the-book campaign. We didn’t know what home brew was because it was all home brew, more or less.
🤣🤣🤣 Nobody walks in LA! You only see 'em drivin' cars out on the street (Nobody's walkin' walkin' walkin') Thank you for watching and commenting, and for the laugh!
"Warlock's Menagerie (1980)" is the follow up DM book, with Monsters, Treasure, and additional rules. See also "Warlock Towers, Reference and Advance Rules (1979)" and "Monkey God's Curse Dungeon Adventure" by Balboa Game Company
Wow! I looked it up just recently and the one I saw was over $1,400!!!! Cool that you have a copy! And, thanks for watching and commenting. Glad you enjoyed the video!
Thanks for the video! Never played Warlock and was only vaguely aware of it. THAC0 wasn't part of 1E AD&D when originally written, though the bones of it were in evidence. The repeating 20s on the Combat Tables thwart the concept of THAC0 which requires a continuous sequential progression to be fully realized. That complication is explained in the DMG. THAC0 was instituted along the way to 2E but not in 1E AD&D out of the gate in the core rules.
@@cyntogia Some folks like to refer to the Appendix in the back with the column heading that almost would make someone believe THAC0 is in 1E since the beginning but that's only part of the picture, and the realization of true THAC0 is undone by the repeated 20s on the Combat Tables. Some years later, beginning with some modules, they sort of move away from the complications that exist in the Combat Tables but they never fully errata the rules until they make changes with 2E AD&D.
@@MarkCMG You're both making the points typically made on both sides of the discussion. I just wanted to jump in and point out you can easily replicate the repeating 20s using THAC0 if you give any attack result an additional +5 to hit if it meets or exceeds 20 with all modifiers. Then, the only remaining concern is ensuring that the starting-out Thieves and M-Us (and 0-level Fighters) are using THAC1 until they level up into the next THAC0 tier; it's not perfectly the same thing as just giving them THAC0 21.
@@googiegress7459 Yup, it's complicated and because it is, THAC0 wasn't a part of the original 1E AD&D rules as written, only introduced in later modules and elsewhere, then truly instituted for 2E AD&D. There really aren't two sides, just what was written and how folks suggest you can ignore the Combat Tables or revise 1E AD&D so THAC0 works for it (neither of which is the same as the claim it was always part of 1E AD&D).
@@MarkCMG I'm personally a believer in a third perspective, and to illustrate it I think it's useful to really define what we're talking about. The question is whether the rules have in them a "To Hit AC 0" number for a figure, which enables the player or DM to calculate off the die roll instead of comparing to the attack matrices every time. DMG Appendix E clearly has that. That's not arguable. It's POSSIBLE the authorial intent was to offer a plain THAC0 alternative to the matrices. But there wasn't a fix for getting the repeating 20s from the attack matrices into that THAC0 calc. Which means it's also possible the authorial intent was for the roller to see "To Hit AC 0" of 16, and then roll, and if the result is 20 and it's not quite a hit then you might need to check the matrices. And because Appendix E has no notes, we can't prove it one way or the other. That inability to prove authorial intent in this case from the text is also not arguable. The existence of the matrices' quirks means a plain THACO as described in 2e is not in 1e. Like ALL of 1e we're in a transitional phase where everything is being reconsidered all the time. So it is my position that 2e's THAC0 is not in 1e. It's also my position that To Hit AC 0 is very much in 1e. Like MUCH of 1e we're talking about shades of grey. I believe when we discuss using those two much more specific terms, we achieve better clarity. And if we're going to reduce the discussion to simpler inexpert terms where a stark binary outcome becomes possible, it's no longer academically useful. And because table play varies so much anyway, and we're talking about a hyperspecific historical quirk, this discussion has no merit outside a purely academic interest.
So interesting, would be cool to see the original version, someone needs to make a pdf for the masses! I pledged for the hardcover + pdf on the first day. Great momentum there, hope you hit the stretch goal soon!
I was aware of them back in the day via ads and articles, but never actually had a chance to play it. But, I had them in the back of my mind while making this video but for whatever reason I was thinking Dave Hargrave was from Northern California and I feel that deserves its own video since, as I mentioned briefly in this video, to someone who lives in California, Northern and Southern California are *very* different. Thank you so much for watching and commenting!
Your appreciation of abstract combat vs rules heavy is what I see as the difference between a role--player vs a typical gamer. Gamers love rules. They need (ney, crave) structure; the more, the better. I used to watch miniature gamers at my local game store with such fascination as to how they kept all of their rules in their heads, and how they were able to complete a turn faster than I expected (though still about10-15 minutes). These early D&D folks mostly came from the gamers world. It's portrayed in the microcosm of Gary Gygax (the gamer) and Dave Arneson (the role-player), played out in their water and oil relationship.
Selma is on that map, but no love for Kingsburg? Ever hear of The Game Preserve in Fresno? It's long gone now, but what a place it was! Great video by the way.
Ha! So glad you enjoyed the video! I spent some of my earliest years in Modesto and my sister went to Fresno State. And my dad grew up partly in Salinas, so I'm pretty familiar with that part of Central California, but sadly, no, I never heard of or visited the Game Preserve. Sounds like I missed out! Thanks for watching and commenting!
Good stuff. It's well worth going through and demonstrating how Warlock directly influenced the first Basic D&D rules, as well as how its dexterity count concept parallels the way casting times and segments were implemented in AD&D.
The more experienced my group the likelier that I'll use critical hit and miss charts. First edition Rolemaster had some of the best, in my opinion. I believe it was RM.
@@daddyrolleda1 Went along with Character Law; Claw Law; Spell law, etc. I gave 'em away decades ago, though last year I got a pdf of the original RM and printed it out.
What strange timing, I was literally talking about this very thing earlier today. Always good to see more people talk about Warlock. I considered trying to make a retro-clone of it years ago just to make the system more easily and legaly available, but put the project on the back burner early on and never got back to it.
That could be a great way to get it some more exposure! With modern design and layout and also knowing how to articulate rules like this from decades of RPG design, I think it could be much better! Maybe you'll get back to it some day. Thanks for watching and commenting! I appreciate it!
From what I saw in this video "The Complete Warlock" that was published in 1978 -- looks like a bit of a mess (not sure why anyone would want to play it) -- I can see looking at it for curiosity's sake -- actually reminds me a bit of Chivalry & Sorcery 1ed which was published a year earlier in 1977. Same thing why would anyone want to play C&S 1ed? -- the rules are overly complex -- and the formatting is painful. The guy who really did it right (with respect to simplicity) was Eric Holmes -- The D&D Blue Box basic set -- is very readable, easy to understand, and play and there is an OSR version of it called BlueHolme. I started playing OD&D in 77, and the Blue Box was the first TTRPG I ever owned bought it in 78 (a year after it came out). For a while we kind of played a mixture of OD&D, Blue Box, and then slowly morphed into playing AD&D 1e as the AD&D hard covers came out in 77 (monster manual), 78 (PHB), and 79 (DM Guide). In 79 when the DM Guide came out -- we were 100% onboard with AD&D 1e. Also, another simple game that came out before Warlock was Tunnels & Trolls 1e (Apr 1975 self-published).
@@quantus5875 Warlock is somewhat more complex than baseline OD&D, but I don’t think I’d consider it over all more complex than say 3e which many people seem like they will swear by until their death. The main complexity is the combat system, most other stuff is either OD&D level or actually streamlined/simpler and it's all certainly more clearly explained. (And honestly I'd probably try to find everything that could be removed from the combat system without breaking it and marking it as optional, which I suspect is how a lot of people engaged with the rules anyways.) The vast majority of the text of, for example, the Dexterity count system described in the video is also just rules rationalization and how to narrativeize it. The actual system is just (iirc), if more than one "arrow"/spell goes off at the same time? Each "archer"/caster does: DEX + 2D6 - Spell points/spell level/number of 3'' from target Whoever has the highest number hits first. If more than two then in order from highest to lowest. It's not the most simple system by a long shot, but it's not a complete nightmare either. Seems to me plenty of Chivalry & Sorcery players want to play 1e considering the large amount of fan-made releases of 1e specifically, and not other editions. From what I understand the newest official edition of C&S mainly went back to 1e (and maybe 2e) and built from there, disregarding later editions (although I haven’t read it so the impression I’ve been given could be wrong). Also Warlock was a stated inspiration in Chevalier (the prototype for C&S when it was intended as a D&D supplement, before being turned stand-alone) in addition to Empire of the Petal Throne (being an inspiration for C&S). People also still play 1e RuneQuest for a point of comparison, and as I understand it modern RuneQuest isn’t really less complex than 1e RQ. Also Warlock was what Holmes played (before writing the Basic set at-least). According to himself he didn’t play baseline OD&D without it, because he didn’t understand how OD&D’s combat system was supposed to work. As noted in this video there were more elements of Warlock Holmes wanted to add to the Basic set, but Gygax wouldn’t allow it, so I don’t even know if after that point he played just Basic or some Warlock-Basic hybrid. There are actually more Warlock-isms in Basic than I remember being mentioned here, off-the-top-of-my-head; race-as-class, Elves being a full combined Fighting-man-Magic-user rather than switching back and forth and Hobbits/Halflings having some Thief-like abilities.
@@quantus5875 Also I should clarify that when I said 3'' in my previous response that was using the game's scale for miniatures, which would be about 18 feet in-game-universe.
That is amazing! I can't tell you how much I appreciate your support of the channel through commenting, your SuperFan donations, and how your pledge to my Kickstarter. Thank you so much!
Thank you, but for this I would have never known Warlock existed. I only learned of Chainmail and OD&D a few years ago despite playing first B/X in or around 1983. My only modules played being KotB, IoD and Castle Amber. So much homebrewed even back then, but most just from the Basic or Expert books and those modules!
Yes, for some odd reason not listed in the Wikipedia list of TTRPGs. Someone should work on getting it added. Shannon Applecline talks about it briefly in his Platinum Appendix and it is mentioned on the Zenopus Archive website -- but yeah thanks to Daddy Rolled a 1 for an excellent video!! and making this information more accessible to the masses. I started playing in 1977 and had never heard of Warlock. The three main TTRPGs that I was aware of at the time were Tunnels & Trolls (1975), Chivalry & Sorcery (1977), and RuneQuest (1978), although I didn't play RuneQuest 2ed (1979) until 1980 and a few sessions of T&T in 1981. Never played C&C (the C&C 1ed rules were just way too convoluted and complicated IMO).
Thank you so much for your support! The Guild Hall was the last part added to the supplement, but it's by far my favorite! It's 8 pages and I truly hope it helps you in your campaign. Cheers, and thank you again!
1:01:52: okay that is VERY weird because one of the earliest gygax letter says specifically that the "fire and forget" magic was a later change because their play system didn't fit into their number of pages... said older system he describes as using MP, although I'm not familiar enough with warlock to know if there were big differences edit: you talk about it later, I didn't know the context for those then, crazy he REALLY didn't want to say their name directly lol
Those warlock rules look to have been written by a Computer Science person. The formatting of it almost hints at nroff/troff being used. Now idly wondering if Rob Pike was involved in those early games.
They might have been CS majors. Or just engineers. Warlock was the most playable system to come out of Cal Tech, playable enough to gain traction. It wasn’t the only one. I used to play D&D in the back room of a game store on Colorado Blvd not far from Cal Tech, and occasionally a student would show up and want us to play test their new systems. The most impressive (and unplayable) combat system was written and bound like a thesis. An inch and a half thick, page after page of matrices and charts of weapons and armor made of different alloys and materials. Penetration angles. The mohr scale. And I don’t know what, I only thumbed through it once. It was as if material science engineers and physicists had gotten together. 😂 (That’s exactly what it was.) The Cal Tech students didn’t (afaik or remember) play at the store. They played in their dorms. The student body was somewhat insular. But we’d still hear stories about epic marathon games. The Warlock rules defined 1 real day as 1 game week for a reason. They were playing for days. That’s why they were reaching the high levels that Gygax couldn’t understand. Your theory about nroff/troff is probably correct. These kids had access to mini computers. The dorms were equipped with terminals.
Oh! That was so frustrating! Thank you for the tip... I will try to remember that next time. And... thank you SO MUCH for staying through the bonus content. That means so much to me. Cheers, friend!
I've been working on my own game system for about 3 months now. Started teaching my wife 5th edition & she reminded me how overly complicated & numbery it is. That was the thought I had at 12 when I was first introduced to 2nd edition having never played a ttrpg game. I started designing my own system as a child, but it was above me at the time. I have the bones of my system & my wife & I are having so much more fun now. I designed a spell point system that is easy to understand & allows for high magic use. The 2 main things I don't like about a lot of systems are that damage, to hit, armor class & hit points all tend to scale together. Meaning at higher levels players have to calculate bigger numbers & do more math however the damage & to hit percentage actually hasn't changed. Some players may feel this adds realism, but for us it just adds numbers. The other thing was how 5e's spell concentration rules are more geared towards balancing spell mechanics rather than thematic realism. Necessary, but at the same time spells that feel to me like they should require concentration like mage hand don't, while spells like bless do. Again, everyone has there own play style. Warlock is lost on me, but I wouldn't knock anyone who does enjoy it. To each their own 🙂
You might check out a lot of the OSR and retro-clone stuff. For an extremely simple gaming rule set, try Searchers of the Unknown (1 page). For a little more depth try Pocket Fantasy RPG (4 pages) or Microlite 74 (16 pages). 5e tries to keep the numbers low, as in modifiers to a d20 roll for example as a correction to 3e's excessive modifier calculation, but then replaces that with a thicket of counters and if:then reactions that can quickly complicate things. While 0e and 1e do an excellent job of keeping numbers small, and 1e/2e have mechanics that taper off PC power gain after mid-level.
Do you know about how the unarmed combat rules have evolved. Who came up with it? Was it intended as punishment for DMs that allowed a scenario to occur where the combatants didn't have weapons?
Thank you so much! The prices were vary slightly based on whether we meet the stretch goal, but right now, the cost of the hard cover will be approximately ~$9 USD. It won't go up very much if the stretch goal is met. I truly appreciate your support. It means a lot. Thank you!
Based on the current page count, it should be ~$4 for the soft cover and ~$9 for the hard cover. Those prices may change very slightly if we meet the stretch goal and I add the extra pages, but it won't be that much more. Thanks for your interest!
I really appreciate your support of the project. Thank you so much! And thanks for your kind comments. I'm so glad you are enjoying the channel. Cheers!
I wish I knew! I've lived in this area for nearly 2 decades and in Pasadena in general for much longer than that, but I've never been able to answer this question. Since you were there... not sure if you remember the cannon, but we used to hear it being fired every June at Graduation and we'd always forget what it was and my wife and I would try to figure out what was happening, but finally did so we wouldn't be surprised. But, I think the cannon is gone now, unfortunately. I know it was stolen by MIT as a prank a long time ago, but I think it's gone for good now.
I graduated from Oxy in 88. My family lived in Glassell Park, Highland Park, and Glendale. I had friends and other family in Pasadena and South Pas. In highschool we used to sneak into the Cal Tech steam tunnels. There was a lot of graffiti down there (including the famous “Frodo Lives!”). But I remember reading some that were scrawled by people near their breaking point. It was sad and a little scary. You guys were under a lot of pressure. I dropped out of Oxy for a year and a half. It wasn’t so much the academic pressure as it was parental pressure from a micromanaging dad. Also I was taking a lot of drugs. 😅
Martin -- very interesting video -- not going to say this one was great because I'm not really sure what your end conclusion was? It sounds like you are saying that D&D borrowed the idea of a simpler combat procedure and combat procedure mechanics from Warlock, and maybe a few other things? The reality is all kinds of ideas were floating around -- so really impossible to tell what came from what. Purely guess work and conjecture in most cases. Also, you forgot to mention Tunnels & Trolls was first drafted in Apr 1975 by Ken St. Andre (official publish date is Apr 75 if you count the version Ken first created or his updated version which was either published in May or June of 1975). This game predates the early version of "Warlock" that was published in Spartan #9 in 1975. And T&T has Magic points (every spell has a point cost), variable damage by weapons (although damage is in number of 6-sided dice you roll), T&T is a very simple game and easy to understand game and has a variety of other innovations to include an opposed dice rolls mechanic, and support for solo play. You're also assuming that the 1975 version out of Spartan #9 was very similar to the 1978 published game version. Without ever seeing the original Spartan #9 fanzine/newsletter version -- I'd argue that the 1978 published game version probably had lots of differences and additions. Note: the 1978 version of Warlock is preceded by a whole slew of TTRPGs to include Empire of the Petal Throne (skills and critical hits), Bunnies & Burrows (skills and a crude martial arts combat system), En Garde! (a social standing system), Tunnels & Trolls (magic point system, variable damage for weapons, opposed rolls, exploding dice mechanic, ...), The Arduin Grimoire (Feb 1977) that has multi-class characters and tons and tons of supplemental rules to OD&D, and C&S -- with super complicated rules. I think C&S might have been the first TTRPG game to introduce schools of magic -- but not sure. Yeah -- it's a mess almost impossible to tell who influenced who (all we can tell for certain is when something showed up in print -- but even then firsts are sometime hard because main of these publications only list the year they were published, not the month -- so a little guessing and conjecture is needed sometimes. 1977 and 1978 is actually pretty late in the TTRPG industry - it's easily the decade of the most TTRPG innovation -- because everything was new with -- ideas floating around like crazy. It's pretty amazing really in the days before email. Yeah, fanzines, magazines, and letters worked really well back then. After watching your video. I did read the Shannon Applecline's bits out of Designers & Dragons Platinum Appendix that talk about Balboa -- yes, it's in the section where he talks about the history of "The Auriana Gang" -- which also is the famous mention of the thief class being invented by the Auriana gang who gave their idea to Gary Gygax, who never gave them credit. :-( I always like this story -- and yes, I believe it is true -- the Auriana Gang should definitely get the atta boy -- but yeah -- we have to remember the thief would have eventually been invented anyway, just happened maybe a year sooner than it would have thanks to the Auriana Gang.
Yep, I have a whole video on the channel dedicated to Empire of the Petal Throne and another one to the TTRPGs from 1975 including Tunnels and Trolls. I didn't forget them or choose to mention them here since I was focusing on something I hadn't already chatted about. I did mention that I've not read the version of Warlock from 1975 so I did have to make assumptions from the 1978 Complete Warlock version, but Zach Howard from Zenopus Archives kindly jumped into the comments to help fill in those gaps, but the main points regarding the combat system and order of combat were the same. Thanks for watching and for your comment.
@@daddyrolleda1 Thanks for the comment, yes just wanted to make sure it was clear, because you didn't mention T&T (1st Ed Apr 1975) in this video (even though you are aware of T&T from one of your videos and did a short overview of it). T&T easily predates the fanzine published version of "Warlock" (Aug 1975). Important because many innovations in T&T that overlap what you talked about, especially that T&T 1Ed had a magic based point system. I do agree with you Gary (like he said) probably knew about this from the get-go (the idea IMO is obvious -- and I like you -- actually am glad he went with the Vancian system). On the second point, yes just wanted to point out that you are making a lot of "assumptions" by showing a 1978 document and talking about it kind of like it was the 1975 doc. Just have to be careful here because you are vaguely talking about who came up with concepts or ideas first -- and three years is a very long time. The 1978 doc could have been influenced by a whole slew of games and publications from 1975, 1976, and 1977. Sounds like you are aware you're making a lot of assumptions -- just wanted to make sure that the people watching this video understand the jumps you are making. Yeah, I agree, sad not to have the actual source doc, when doing your research for this video -- but I imagine a "legal" copy of Spartan #9 is very expensive and hard to find. (In fact, never heard of this fanzine, before you mentioned it in your video).
I hesitate to share *too* much because sometimes I feel I'm putting too much out on social media, but I moved to Pasadena from the Inland Empire nearly 30 years ago (best move I've ever made!) and I have been very involved in various parent groups for PUSD over the years. Also, when Eddie Van Halen died, I went with my friends to leave a tribute at the liquor store on Allen where he and his brother used to hang out, and my chalk message mentioned PUSD since the Van Halen brothers went to schools in PUSD. #PUSDStrong Thank you for watching and commenting!
@@rwustudiosI’ve got a cousin who used to see them play backyard parties when she was in high school. By the time I was old enough to go to those kinds of parties, they’d already released their first two albums. Hey, do you remember the game store on Colorado? I think it was west of PCC. It was next to a video arcade. I played there a bunch 1980-84. Edit: I think it was near the corner of Colorado and Michigan.
@@MarcosElMalo2 I'm a bit younger but I think no my Uncle used to head down to that store. My Mom and your cousin most likely were in school together. Her and 9 of my Aunts and Uncles...
I moved to Pasadena in 1995 so a few of the places had changed and at the time I didn't get too far east (I was living a bit closer to Old Town). My friends have told me that on the corner of Allen and Del Mar there was a popular place called the Pacman Arcade. It then became a Beauty Salon school for quite a while, then sat empty until it was purchased by the guy who bought Game Zone (on the south side of Colorado across the street from the Von's) and then turned it into a place called Game Empire; he moved out of the old location and into the site of the former Pacman Arcade, but he sadly passed away of cancer a few years ago and his wife sold the business to a customer. It's now called Odyssey Games. I visit frequently.
I am very tickled pink by this video. It does explain some of our conversations at DaveCON. And there are a lot of truth to what you say. Small note you did kind of skip over the Ironside rules that eventually became Don’t Give Up the ship that Arneson used shortly after giving up the Domesday vol 5 rules because of player revolt and used, but you did bring that up later. it wasn’t a total drop of those rules. Of course they were elements pulled still referenced to, but the vast majority of the actual combat was dropped for what Dave was working. I would definitely say that Dave and David were both about ease of combat and not really getting it muddled down. And today’s combat systems are onerous. And I know I talk to you a little bit about the missing rule book, the one that explains gameplay and role-playing. a lot of people have made assumptions about what us playing, and decide to redefine it as Larping or not really realizing the role-play is you being somebody else in both behavior and attitude. That’s the role-playing. The character background and other information is just to help you get into the mood or mental state and is not necessary. Rule of order you are correct different people handled it differently. For example, I believe Gary loved the idea of simultaneous combat that both sides are occurring at the same time I could be wrong. that is how old people in Minnesota explain to me and having not played with Gary. I can’t attest to it. But I know more about pretty much getting everyone to clear their actions and then working out the results based upon what the creatures were doing or NPCs in terms of the leveling, I have to kind of point out that Gary is kind of correct about the power creep that was constantly occurring in dungeons and dragons. When I was first introduced to the game, I was playing with some players who might’ve gotten up to 10th level , and they were up against players who were against player versus player and claimed to googolplex the power googolplex the power googolplex. And the runner-up was at 6000th level. it was ridiculous. in the current version of fifth edition, it’s not uncommon to see players make 40th level and not even make it to the dungeon yet. I really have a problem with this by the time you make it to the dungeon you’re way overpowered. Players just don’t have a comprehension to understand what that’s about. Trouble is I would also say that Gary made rules that made it pretty easy for players to power creep and later additions only made it worse especially with the roll three drop the lowest. everyone’s game I played in. We do not consider the players the heroes. We consider them to be common folk who hope to become hero by adventuring and not dying.
I don't think it was realism they were shooting for in combat. I believe they were looking for an objective way to adjudicate the process of combat, so the PCs/players get a fair chance to utilize planning and strategy without get an off the cuff decision of the GM that "oh, the monster hit you before you acted" based on a snap judgement.
I am having trouble with the title of this video as it does not seem to match what you are saying..perhaps influence is the wrong word. Maybe it should be called California vs. Midwest...Early variations of D&D.
On the contrary, I think the richness in choices and options in 1e that greatly impact gameplay, and interconnected puzzles like encumbrance, illumination, food and water, and overland travel, which all fade in importance by mid-level as PCs gain magic that eases or negates these burdens, shows that 1e is extremely good at offering a lot to chew on at levels 1-7. This is the level range where dungeon delving is super common, and that makes certain things important like weapon speed, space required, Thief skills, breaking doors, surprise and encounter distance, etc. This is NOT just "roleplaying", this is a wargame about a small team of specialists assaulting a fortified dungeon environment. Although of course there is important parelying with creatures, and negotiating with NPCs especially in town, and I would again characterize these as interactions with game elements rather than purely roleplay. There are wins and losses in them, and something to gain, the choice to ignore it entirely. So it's war in the sense that diplomacy is prelude to war. Only interactions between PC team members are really purely roleplaying. As for enemies, the humanoids and undead up through 4 HD are human-scale and work a lot like man-to-man combat, and these enemies are fairly common. Your encounter tables are also going to include a lot of actual humans and demihumans. Maybe not in a dungeon, but certainly in town and the "close" wilderness. And nonhuman enemies like Stirges and Giant Rats don't operate any differently from humans unless you actually use the WvAC rules (almost none did or do) and speed factor for monsters is generally as unarmed fighting ... because they're unarmed. 2e introduced SF for large monsters so you could use that if you like. Rules pottage can make for a good D&D game. Then at mid-level the DM's creativity becomes much more important in creating new challenges, although the game supports things like seafaring and underwater adventure, aerial adventure, and deep wilderness adventure. Monstrous monsters come into play more frequently that don't wear armor or wield weapons, and magic weapons have faster weapon speeds approaching 0, and being in larger dungeons or outdoors gives more room to fight and opens up the tactical possibilities and expectations - and lacking the security of impassible walls to guard your flanks can be a big change to the wargame. And the rewards on the more valuable and high-end range of the magic item lists start becoming a lot more available. The mid-level spell options start becoming really useful on a large battlefield. Too, you can imagine a wargames setup where there are nonhuman elements that don't use exactly the same rules. A tank or artillery piece in a WW2 game, or a high-altitude drone spotter who calls in airstrikes in a modern setting. A medieval wargame could include siege engines, fortifications, men-at-arms, sappers, and the construction and hiring of the same - and 1e DMG devotes large sections to this. And finally at high level, again DM creativity is impactful, but premade challenges like plane travel become available. There are a lot of really powerful magic items that players can still salivate over, high-level spells, etc. and these are generally modifications to the same rules used before, and applicable in a dungeon or wilderness adventuring environment. What we don't see is support for mystery-investigation, extensive rules for negotiation and interrogation, seduction, PC lineage, political jockeying, growth in PC personalities and achievement of emotional objectives, etc. It is not a game about those things! In fact, with magic like Charm Person and ESP it becomes trivial to bypass a lot of these situations and centering an adventure or campaign around them will create rather stale gameplay. The DM can always ban those powers, such as by making the vital NPCs immune to them, but that is a campaign-level change and doesn't affect what the published game is about. These roleplaying elements should exist in the D&D wargame, just not as the central pillars. For a game that is truly about these things, see Burning Wheel. So, I would suggest instead that it will take 5e players a very long time to realize that D&D is almost completely a wargame in which you are very much encouraged to roleplay.
The whole thing about Gary changing his mind etc is pretty to explain. OD&D Gary was Chill Hobbyist Gary. AD&D Gary was asshole corporate cocaine fiend Gary.
Always great content but youtube makes it impossible to watch by keep bombarding me with 30-40 second Ads. RUclips is a premium only service nowadays. Only creator's can change this trend by turning off midroll Ads, take a short term hit on revenue and give youtube back to the people.
Martin, thanks for all the content you've made and keep making, I find it very interesting to listen to these longer episodes.
I really appreciate you saying this! Thank you so much for taking the time to write a comment to let me know. It means a lot to me. Cheers, and happy gaming!
Wow! Great video Martin. Talking about the Complete Warlock, Balboa Game company, and the Warhouse really brought up some great memories as I practically grew up at the Warhouse since 1981 until it closed in 2022 with the passing of the owner and my good friend Steven Luckey. The early history of the game and its variations is important to the games legacy as well as its future. Thanks for taking the time to explain the gaming scene in California during those early days. 40+ years of my life with good friends and memories of playing the games we all love. Thank you. Looking forward to more videos from you.
But what if the monsters in the dnd world really are men in gorilla suits?
"Magical Fighting Thief" sounds like it could be part of an anime title.
Oh my goodness, you're totally right!
You should write/draw that! That'd be awesome!
Thanks for watching and commenting. Cheers!
I can see Sam Riegel play a charter like this.
This is precisely my sub-niche of interest in our beloved hobby - thanks for spotlighting this!
I am so glad you enjoyed it! Thank you so much for watching and commenting, and also for your support of the channel!
Re: the addition of Agility: Dexterity was originally supposed to determine only accuracy with missiles and who got off the first shot. It was later broadened to include agility, but that was after the creation of these rules. DragonQuest (1980) also separated manual dexterity and agility.
Good point.
FYI, the 1975 Warlock does not include Paladins, Rangers, or Triple or Quadruple Multi-Classes. It's limited to the following classes: Magic-Users, Clerics, Thieves, Fighting Men, Dwarves, Hobbits, Magical-Fighter Combination, Magical-Cleric Combination, Clerical-Fighter Combination and Elves. Essentially, the LBB classes (although it's definitely in the "Race as Class" camp) plus Thieves and Combinations of the three LBB classes. The "Combination" classes are meant for humans and each have their own level/experience tables.
Thank you for clarifying that! I really appreciate it!
Just wanted to thank you for your web site!! Absolutely wonderful!! I started playing OD&D in 1977 and bought Holmes Basic in 1978 (read the rules one Sunday from cover to cover). It was the first game that I ever GMed in 1978 (was always a player in OD&D). Fond memories of playing the Zenopus Tower adventure that was in that game!!
btw: For people that many not know what LBBs are thought I'd include the definition. LBB is the acronym for Little Brown Books. They refer to the first three rule booklets of the OD&D rules.
Just saw the kickstarter project dropped and immediately backed it Martin. Good luck with it!
I appreciate that so much! Thank you for your ongoing support me me and the channel. It means a lot. Cheers!
Judges Guild was coming out about then. I still have most of them.
I feel like I have at least heard of a lot of the things you have posted about before, but this was entirely novel and very interesting new information about the history of the hobby! Thank you so much for doing this research and sharing what you've found.
I appreciate that! I will also direct you to Zenopus Archives who researched a lot of this stuff years ago. They are so knowledgeable about the Holmes edition of Basic D&D (hence the "Zenopus" name of the blog which comes from the Tower of Zenopus in that edition).
There's a chapter in a recently published book called "50 Years of Dungeons & Dragons" (finally got my copy yesterday!) that includes a lot of this info, written by Zenopus Archive and Tony Rowe. I haven't read the entire book yet, but their chapter is really good.
zenopusarchives.blogspot.com/
mitpress.mit.edu/9780262547604/fifty-years-of-idungeons-and-dragonsi/
I really appreciate the nerdy scholarship you’re doing.
I love the Caltech campus. Those turtles wander pretty far from the pond. In highschool, my friends and I would sneak into the steam tunnels. In the mid to late 2000s it was a relaxing place to take my dog and let him run around off leash.
Anyway, I think Warlock was probably the least nerdy RPG thing that was played at Caltech. I used to play at a rpg store on Colorado (near the cross street of Michigan, I think), and occasional a Caltech student would drop in wanting us to play test something they came up with. They were systems that only an engineering student could love. 😂
Back when I played (approx 79-84) every game had “house rules”. I don’t think I’ve ever played in a by-the-book campaign. We didn’t know what home brew was because it was all home brew, more or less.
I lost my slide rule, so playing 0e DnD is out of the question! 😂
Hahaha! 🤓
You only had one? Poser.
Thank you! I've heard of Warlock but didn't know it relationship to D&D. Always informative!
Thank you so much for watching and commenting! I really appreciate it!
Walking in LA are you mad!
Thanks for another fun video
🤣🤣🤣 Nobody walks in LA!
You only see 'em drivin' cars out on the street
(Nobody's walkin' walkin' walkin')
Thank you for watching and commenting, and for the laugh!
"Warlock's Menagerie (1980)" is the follow up DM book, with Monsters, Treasure, and additional rules. See also "Warlock Towers, Reference and Advance Rules (1979)" and "Monkey God's Curse Dungeon Adventure" by Balboa Game Company
Oh, thanks for this! I appreciate it!
Love the video! Being the Obsessive Collector I had to track down a copy of Spartan #9. I did! And now I’m broke! 😂😂😂
Wow! I looked it up just recently and the one I saw was over $1,400!!!!
Cool that you have a copy! And, thanks for watching and commenting. Glad you enjoyed the video!
Went all in on the Kickstarter, for you Martin. Love what you do and the game you run for your daughter and her friends. ❤
Thanks for the video! Never played Warlock and was only vaguely aware of it. THAC0 wasn't part of 1E AD&D when originally written, though the bones of it were in evidence. The repeating 20s on the Combat Tables thwart the concept of THAC0 which requires a continuous sequential progression to be fully realized. That complication is explained in the DMG. THAC0 was instituted along the way to 2E but not in 1E AD&D out of the gate in the core rules.
It's in the DMG
@@cyntogia Some folks like to refer to the Appendix in the back with the column heading that almost would make someone believe THAC0 is in 1E since the beginning but that's only part of the picture, and the realization of true THAC0 is undone by the repeated 20s on the Combat Tables. Some years later, beginning with some modules, they sort of move away from the complications that exist in the Combat Tables but they never fully errata the rules until they make changes with 2E AD&D.
@@MarkCMG You're both making the points typically made on both sides of the discussion. I just wanted to jump in and point out you can easily replicate the repeating 20s using THAC0 if you give any attack result an additional +5 to hit if it meets or exceeds 20 with all modifiers. Then, the only remaining concern is ensuring that the starting-out Thieves and M-Us (and 0-level Fighters) are using THAC1 until they level up into the next THAC0 tier; it's not perfectly the same thing as just giving them THAC0 21.
@@googiegress7459 Yup, it's complicated and because it is, THAC0 wasn't a part of the original 1E AD&D rules as written, only introduced in later modules and elsewhere, then truly instituted for 2E AD&D. There really aren't two sides, just what was written and how folks suggest you can ignore the Combat Tables or revise 1E AD&D so THAC0 works for it (neither of which is the same as the claim it was always part of 1E AD&D).
@@MarkCMG I'm personally a believer in a third perspective, and to illustrate it I think it's useful to really define what we're talking about. The question is whether the rules have in them a "To Hit AC 0" number for a figure, which enables the player or DM to calculate off the die roll instead of comparing to the attack matrices every time.
DMG Appendix E clearly has that. That's not arguable.
It's POSSIBLE the authorial intent was to offer a plain THAC0 alternative to the matrices.
But there wasn't a fix for getting the repeating 20s from the attack matrices into that THAC0 calc. Which means it's also possible the authorial intent was for the roller to see "To Hit AC 0" of 16, and then roll, and if the result is 20 and it's not quite a hit then you might need to check the matrices.
And because Appendix E has no notes, we can't prove it one way or the other. That inability to prove authorial intent in this case from the text is also not arguable.
The existence of the matrices' quirks means a plain THACO as described in 2e is not in 1e. Like ALL of 1e we're in a transitional phase where everything is being reconsidered all the time.
So it is my position that 2e's THAC0 is not in 1e. It's also my position that To Hit AC 0 is very much in 1e. Like MUCH of 1e we're talking about shades of grey. I believe when we discuss using those two much more specific terms, we achieve better clarity.
And if we're going to reduce the discussion to simpler inexpert terms where a stark binary outcome becomes possible, it's no longer academically useful. And because table play varies so much anyway, and we're talking about a hyperspecific historical quirk, this discussion has no merit outside a purely academic interest.
So interesting, would be cool to see the original version, someone needs to make a pdf for the masses!
I pledged for the hardcover + pdf on the first day. Great momentum there, hope you hit the stretch goal soon!
Have you ever checked out or played Arduin by David Hargrave?
I was aware of them back in the day via ads and articles, but never actually had a chance to play it. But, I had them in the back of my mind while making this video but for whatever reason I was thinking Dave Hargrave was from Northern California and I feel that deserves its own video since, as I mentioned briefly in this video, to someone who lives in California, Northern and Southern California are *very* different.
Thank you so much for watching and commenting!
finally watching this.
Thank you! I hope you enjoy it!
Great video Martin! Very informative! 🙂
Your appreciation of abstract combat vs rules heavy is what I see as the difference between a role--player vs a typical gamer. Gamers love rules. They need (ney, crave) structure; the more, the better. I used to watch miniature gamers at my local game store with such fascination as to how they kept all of their rules in their heads, and how they were able to complete a turn faster than I expected (though still about10-15 minutes). These early D&D folks mostly came from the gamers world. It's portrayed in the microcosm of Gary Gygax (the gamer) and Dave Arneson (the role-player), played out in their water and oil relationship.
Selma is on that map, but no love for Kingsburg? Ever hear of The Game Preserve in Fresno? It's long gone now, but what a place it was! Great video by the way.
Ha! So glad you enjoyed the video!
I spent some of my earliest years in Modesto and my sister went to Fresno State. And my dad grew up partly in Salinas, so I'm pretty familiar with that part of Central California, but sadly, no, I never heard of or visited the Game Preserve. Sounds like I missed out!
Thanks for watching and commenting!
I’ll be listening today while I walk my dog in 100 degree weather. Good times. 😂
You are such a great person, and I'm so happy to have you as part of this community. Cheers, friend.
What’s your AC, encumbrance, and the humidity?
Good stuff. It's well worth going through and demonstrating how Warlock directly influenced the first Basic D&D rules, as well as how its dexterity count concept parallels the way casting times and segments were implemented in AD&D.
The more experienced my group the likelier that I'll use critical hit and miss charts. First edition Rolemaster had some of the best, in my opinion. I believe it was RM.
I never played Role Master, but I would believe it based on my friends referring to it as "Chart Master."
@@daddyrolleda1 Went along with Character Law; Claw Law; Spell law, etc. I gave 'em away decades ago, though last year I got a pdf of the original RM and printed it out.
What strange timing, I was literally talking about this very thing earlier today. Always good to see more people talk about Warlock. I considered trying to make a retro-clone of it years ago just to make the system more easily and legaly available, but put the project on the back burner early on and never got back to it.
That could be a great way to get it some more exposure! With modern design and layout and also knowing how to articulate rules like this from decades of RPG design, I think it could be much better! Maybe you'll get back to it some day.
Thanks for watching and commenting! I appreciate it!
Synchronicities continue to happen with this channel 😱
From what I saw in this video "The Complete Warlock" that was published in 1978 -- looks like a bit of a mess (not sure why anyone would want to play it) -- I can see looking at it for curiosity's sake -- actually reminds me a bit of Chivalry & Sorcery 1ed which was published a year earlier in 1977. Same thing why would anyone want to play C&S 1ed? -- the rules are overly complex -- and the formatting is painful.
The guy who really did it right (with respect to simplicity) was Eric Holmes -- The D&D Blue Box basic set -- is very readable, easy to understand, and play and there is an OSR version of it called BlueHolme. I started playing OD&D in 77, and the Blue Box was the first TTRPG I ever owned bought it in 78 (a year after it came out). For a while we kind of played a mixture of OD&D, Blue Box, and then slowly morphed into playing AD&D 1e as the AD&D hard covers came out in 77 (monster manual), 78 (PHB), and 79 (DM Guide). In 79 when the DM Guide came out -- we were 100% onboard with AD&D 1e.
Also, another simple game that came out before Warlock was Tunnels & Trolls 1e (Apr 1975 self-published).
@@quantus5875 Warlock is somewhat more complex than baseline OD&D, but I don’t think I’d consider it over all more complex than say 3e which many people seem like they will swear by until their death. The main complexity is the combat system, most other stuff is either OD&D level or actually streamlined/simpler and it's all certainly more clearly explained. (And honestly I'd probably try to find everything that could be removed from the combat system without breaking it and marking it as optional, which I suspect is how a lot of people engaged with the rules anyways.)
The vast majority of the text of, for example, the Dexterity count system described in the video is also just rules rationalization and how to narrativeize it. The actual system is just (iirc), if more than one "arrow"/spell goes off at the same time? Each "archer"/caster does:
DEX + 2D6 - Spell points/spell level/number of 3'' from target
Whoever has the highest number hits first. If more than two then in order from highest to lowest. It's not the most simple system by a long shot, but it's not a complete nightmare either.
Seems to me plenty of Chivalry & Sorcery players want to play 1e considering the large amount of fan-made releases of 1e specifically, and not other editions. From what I understand the newest official edition of C&S mainly went back to 1e (and maybe 2e) and built from there, disregarding later editions (although I haven’t read it so the impression I’ve been given could be wrong). Also Warlock was a stated inspiration in Chevalier (the prototype for C&S when it was intended as a D&D supplement, before being turned stand-alone) in addition to Empire of the Petal Throne (being an inspiration for C&S).
People also still play 1e RuneQuest for a point of comparison, and as I understand it modern RuneQuest isn’t really less complex than 1e RQ.
Also Warlock was what Holmes played (before writing the Basic set at-least). According to himself he didn’t play baseline OD&D without it, because he didn’t understand how OD&D’s combat system was supposed to work. As noted in this video there were more elements of Warlock Holmes wanted to add to the Basic set, but Gygax wouldn’t allow it, so I don’t even know if after that point he played just Basic or some Warlock-Basic hybrid. There are actually more Warlock-isms in Basic than I remember being mentioned here, off-the-top-of-my-head; race-as-class, Elves being a full combined Fighting-man-Magic-user rather than switching back and forth and Hobbits/Halflings having some Thief-like abilities.
@@quantus5875 Also I should clarify that when I said 3'' in my previous response that was using the game's scale for miniatures, which would be about 18 feet in-game-universe.
Got the hard back and pdf + T-shirt for the Kickstarter!
That is amazing!
I can't tell you how much I appreciate your support of the channel through commenting, your SuperFan donations, and how your pledge to my Kickstarter. Thank you so much!
@@daddyrolleda1 Just happy to help what I can. Keep making great content!
Thanks for the video. I also backed your project 🎉
I really appreciate the support. Thank you so much!
And, also, thank you for watching and commenting. Cheers!
Thank you, but for this I would have never known Warlock existed. I only learned of Chainmail and OD&D a few years ago despite playing first B/X in or around 1983. My only modules played being KotB, IoD and Castle Amber. So much homebrewed even back then, but most just from the Basic or Expert books and those modules!
Yes, for some odd reason not listed in the Wikipedia list of TTRPGs. Someone should work on getting it added. Shannon Applecline talks about it briefly in his Platinum Appendix and it is mentioned on the Zenopus Archive website -- but yeah thanks to Daddy Rolled a 1 for an excellent video!! and making this information more accessible to the masses.
I started playing in 1977 and had never heard of Warlock. The three main TTRPGs that I was aware of at the time were Tunnels & Trolls (1975), Chivalry & Sorcery (1977), and RuneQuest (1978), although I didn't play RuneQuest 2ed (1979) until 1980 and a few sessions of T&T in 1981. Never played C&C (the C&C 1ed rules were just way too convoluted and complicated IMO).
I’m really looking forward to the Guild hall stuff. I am about to start a new campaign that has the guild hall as a main part of it.
Thank you so much for your support!
The Guild Hall was the last part added to the supplement, but it's by far my favorite! It's 8 pages and I truly hope it helps you in your campaign.
Cheers, and thank you again!
1:01:52: okay that is VERY weird because one of the earliest gygax letter says specifically that the "fire and forget" magic was a later change because their play system didn't fit into their number of pages... said older system he describes as using MP, although I'm not familiar enough with warlock to know if there were big differences
edit: you talk about it later, I didn't know the context for those then, crazy he REALLY didn't want to say their name directly lol
You should absolutely find that group and play a game with them.
CalTech!? The turtle pond! Love that campus!! Didn't know you were in the 626. See you at the PCC Flea market maybe!
Curious your thoughts on Game Empi... errr... Odyssey on Allen and Colorado.
@@bakus1er a fantastic shop, such atmosphere is lacking in most game stores.
You're awesome 😎
Sorry for the long delay in thanking you, but I so appreciate your continued support. Thank you so much. Cheers!
@@daddyrolleda1 No need to apologize.
Those warlock rules look to have been written by a Computer Science person. The formatting of it almost hints at nroff/troff being used. Now idly wondering if Rob Pike was involved in those early games.
They might have been CS majors. Or just engineers.
Warlock was the most playable system to come out of Cal Tech, playable enough to gain traction. It wasn’t the only one.
I used to play D&D in the back room of a game store on Colorado Blvd not far from Cal Tech, and occasionally a student would show up and want us to play test their new systems.
The most impressive (and unplayable) combat system was written and bound like a thesis. An inch and a half thick, page after page of matrices and charts of weapons and armor made of different alloys and materials. Penetration angles. The mohr scale. And I don’t know what, I only thumbed through it once. It was as if material science engineers and physicists had gotten together. 😂 (That’s exactly what it was.)
The Cal Tech students didn’t (afaik or remember) play at the store. They played in their dorms. The student body was somewhat insular. But we’d still hear stories about epic marathon games.
The Warlock rules defined 1 real day as 1 game week for a reason. They were playing for days. That’s why they were reaching the high levels that Gygax couldn’t understand.
Your theory about nroff/troff is probably correct. These kids had access to mini computers. The dorms were equipped with terminals.
Just an fyi the camera wanted to stay focused on the album cover as it has a human face. You needed to move that out of the frame. Love your stuff.
Oh! That was so frustrating!
Thank you for the tip... I will try to remember that next time.
And... thank you SO MUCH for staying through the bonus content. That means so much to me. Cheers, friend!
A had been thinking alarms & excursions was a weird title for a fanzine 😆
Gotta stay weird! ;)
I've been working on my own game system for about 3 months now. Started teaching my wife 5th edition & she reminded me how overly complicated & numbery it is. That was the thought I had at 12 when I was first introduced to 2nd edition having never played a ttrpg game. I started designing my own system as a child, but it was above me at the time. I have the bones of my system & my wife & I are having so much more fun now. I designed a spell point system that is easy to understand & allows for high magic use. The 2 main things I don't like about a lot of systems are that damage, to hit, armor class & hit points all tend to scale together. Meaning at higher levels players have to calculate bigger numbers & do more math however the damage & to hit percentage actually hasn't changed. Some players may feel this adds realism, but for us it just adds numbers. The other thing was how 5e's spell concentration rules are more geared towards balancing spell mechanics rather than thematic realism. Necessary, but at the same time spells that feel to me like they should require concentration like mage hand don't, while spells like bless do. Again, everyone has there own play style. Warlock is lost on me, but I wouldn't knock anyone who does enjoy it. To each their own 🙂
You might check out a lot of the OSR and retro-clone stuff.
For an extremely simple gaming rule set, try Searchers of the Unknown (1 page). For a little more depth try Pocket Fantasy RPG (4 pages) or Microlite 74 (16 pages).
5e tries to keep the numbers low, as in modifiers to a d20 roll for example as a correction to 3e's excessive modifier calculation, but then replaces that with a thicket of counters and if:then reactions that can quickly complicate things. While 0e and 1e do an excellent job of keeping numbers small, and 1e/2e have mechanics that taper off PC power gain after mid-level.
Just curious. Is this the first instance of multi-class characters in the rules / rules-variants? A full-on Fighter-MU-Thief-Cleric is wild, BTW.
I dont play any ttrpg's (yet), however I absolutely love the lore and the history behind it all.
I heard it was Hero System that was worked out there? ~ Brian
Barbarians with lightsabers is what we used to call it. Because that is what is going to happen
Ha! Possible, but I think the early version of the variant came out *before* Star Wars!
Are you a fan of the milestone version of leveling up ?
Do you know about how the unarmed combat rules have evolved. Who came up with it? Was it intended as punishment for DMs that allowed a scenario to occur where the combatants didn't have weapons?
🤘
Cheers! I'm glad you enjoyed the video! 🤘
I pledged for the hardcover with the pdf. How does the hardcover work. It says at the cost of printing? How much is that?
Thank you so much!
The prices were vary slightly based on whether we meet the stretch goal, but right now, the cost of the hard cover will be approximately ~$9 USD. It won't go up very much if the stretch goal is met.
I truly appreciate your support. It means a lot. Thank you!
@@daddyrolleda1 thanks for all the hard work I appreciate it
Quick question on the POD discounts for your KS. Any ideas roughly what the printing costs will be?
Based on the current page count, it should be ~$4 for the soft cover and ~$9 for the hard cover. Those prices may change very slightly if we meet the stretch goal and I add the extra pages, but it won't be that much more.
Thanks for your interest!
Great, thanks for the response!
Went with the hardcover and PDF. Thanks for the many, many hours of history, ideas, and entertainment, DRa1! I hope this is a huge success for you.
I really appreciate your support of the project. Thank you so much! And thanks for your kind comments. I'm so glad you are enjoying the channel. Cheers!
As a former Techer (flamed out in 1988), I must ask: which Houses did they belong to?
I wish I knew! I've lived in this area for nearly 2 decades and in Pasadena in general for much longer than that, but I've never been able to answer this question.
Since you were there... not sure if you remember the cannon, but we used to hear it being fired every June at Graduation and we'd always forget what it was and my wife and I would try to figure out what was happening, but finally did so we wouldn't be surprised. But, I think the cannon is gone now, unfortunately. I know it was stolen by MIT as a prank a long time ago, but I think it's gone for good now.
I graduated from Oxy in 88. My family lived in Glassell Park, Highland Park, and Glendale. I had friends and other family in Pasadena and South Pas.
In highschool we used to sneak into the Cal Tech steam tunnels. There was a lot of graffiti down there (including the famous “Frodo Lives!”). But I remember reading some that were scrawled by people near their breaking point. It was sad and a little scary. You guys were under a lot of pressure.
I dropped out of Oxy for a year and a half. It wasn’t so much the academic pressure as it was parental pressure from a micromanaging dad. Also I was taking a lot of drugs. 😅
Martin -- very interesting video -- not going to say this one was great because I'm not really sure what your end conclusion was? It sounds like you are saying that D&D borrowed the idea of a simpler combat procedure and combat procedure mechanics from Warlock, and maybe a few other things?
The reality is all kinds of ideas were floating around -- so really impossible to tell what came from what. Purely guess work and conjecture in most cases.
Also, you forgot to mention Tunnels & Trolls was first drafted in Apr 1975 by Ken St. Andre (official publish date is Apr 75 if you count the version Ken first created or his updated version which was either published in May or June of 1975). This game predates the early version of "Warlock" that was published in Spartan #9 in 1975. And T&T has Magic points (every spell has a point cost), variable damage by weapons (although damage is in number of 6-sided dice you roll), T&T is a very simple game and easy to understand game and has a variety of other innovations to include an opposed dice rolls mechanic, and support for solo play.
You're also assuming that the 1975 version out of Spartan #9 was very similar to the 1978 published game version. Without ever seeing the original Spartan #9 fanzine/newsletter version -- I'd argue that the 1978 published game version probably had lots of differences and additions. Note: the 1978 version of Warlock is preceded by a whole slew of TTRPGs to include Empire of the Petal Throne (skills and critical hits), Bunnies & Burrows (skills and a crude martial arts combat system), En Garde! (a social standing system), Tunnels & Trolls (magic point system, variable damage for weapons, opposed rolls, exploding dice mechanic, ...), The Arduin Grimoire (Feb 1977) that has multi-class characters and tons and tons of supplemental rules to OD&D, and C&S -- with super complicated rules. I think C&S might have been the first TTRPG game to introduce schools of magic -- but not sure.
Yeah -- it's a mess almost impossible to tell who influenced who (all we can tell for certain is when something showed up in print -- but even then firsts are sometime hard because main of these publications only list the year they were published, not the month -- so a little guessing and conjecture is needed sometimes. 1977 and 1978 is actually pretty late in the TTRPG industry - it's easily the decade of the most TTRPG innovation -- because everything was new with -- ideas floating around like crazy. It's pretty amazing really in the days before email. Yeah, fanzines, magazines, and letters worked really well back then.
After watching your video. I did read the Shannon Applecline's bits out of Designers & Dragons Platinum Appendix that talk about Balboa -- yes, it's in the section where he talks about the history of "The Auriana Gang" -- which also is the famous mention of the thief class being invented by the Auriana gang who gave their idea to Gary Gygax, who never gave them credit. :-( I always like this story -- and yes, I believe it is true -- the Auriana Gang should definitely get the atta boy -- but yeah -- we have to remember the thief would have eventually been invented anyway, just happened maybe a year sooner than it would have thanks to the Auriana Gang.
Yep, I have a whole video on the channel dedicated to Empire of the Petal Throne and another one to the TTRPGs from 1975 including Tunnels and Trolls. I didn't forget them or choose to mention them here since I was focusing on something I hadn't already chatted about.
I did mention that I've not read the version of Warlock from 1975 so I did have to make assumptions from the 1978 Complete Warlock version, but Zach Howard from Zenopus Archives kindly jumped into the comments to help fill in those gaps, but the main points regarding the combat system and order of combat were the same.
Thanks for watching and for your comment.
@@daddyrolleda1 Thanks for the comment, yes just wanted to make sure it was clear, because you didn't mention T&T (1st Ed Apr 1975) in this video (even though you are aware of T&T from one of your videos and did a short overview of it). T&T easily predates the fanzine published version of "Warlock" (Aug 1975). Important because many innovations in T&T that overlap what you talked about, especially that T&T 1Ed had a magic based point system. I do agree with you Gary (like he said) probably knew about this from the get-go (the idea IMO is obvious -- and I like you -- actually am glad he went with the Vancian system).
On the second point, yes just wanted to point out that you are making a lot of "assumptions" by showing a 1978 document and talking about it kind of like it was the 1975 doc. Just have to be careful here because you are vaguely talking about who came up with concepts or ideas first -- and three years is a very long time. The 1978 doc could have been influenced by a whole slew of games and publications from 1975, 1976, and 1977. Sounds like you are aware you're making a lot of assumptions -- just wanted to make sure that the people watching this video understand the jumps you are making. Yeah, I agree, sad not to have the actual source doc, when doing your research for this video -- but I imagine a "legal" copy of Spartan #9 is very expensive and hard to find. (In fact, never heard of this fanzine, before you mentioned it in your video).
Pasadena born.
Altadena fsmily simce the 60s
John Muir HS
Woop woop
I hesitate to share *too* much because sometimes I feel I'm putting too much out on social media, but I moved to Pasadena from the Inland Empire nearly 30 years ago (best move I've ever made!) and I have been very involved in various parent groups for PUSD over the years. Also, when Eddie Van Halen died, I went with my friends to leave a tribute at the liquor store on Allen where he and his brother used to hang out, and my chalk message mentioned PUSD since the Van Halen brothers went to schools in PUSD.
#PUSDStrong
Thank you for watching and commenting!
@@daddyrolleda1 My mom still talks about Van Halen being a garage band.
We've been up off Lake for 60 plus years.
@@rwustudiosI’ve got a cousin who used to see them play backyard parties when she was in high school. By the time I was old enough to go to those kinds of parties, they’d already released their first two albums.
Hey, do you remember the game store on Colorado? I think it was west of PCC. It was next to a video arcade. I played there a bunch 1980-84.
Edit: I think it was near the corner of Colorado and Michigan.
@@MarcosElMalo2 I'm a bit younger but I think no my Uncle used to head down to that store.
My Mom and your cousin most likely were in school together. Her and 9 of my Aunts and Uncles...
I moved to Pasadena in 1995 so a few of the places had changed and at the time I didn't get too far east (I was living a bit closer to Old Town). My friends have told me that on the corner of Allen and Del Mar there was a popular place called the Pacman Arcade. It then became a Beauty Salon school for quite a while, then sat empty until it was purchased by the guy who bought Game Zone (on the south side of Colorado across the street from the Von's) and then turned it into a place called Game Empire; he moved out of the old location and into the site of the former Pacman Arcade, but he sadly passed away of cancer a few years ago and his wife sold the business to a customer. It's now called Odyssey Games. I visit frequently.
"he's human, people change their minds." especially when money is involved.
Warlock sounds like the first time autism met tabletop rpgs.
I am very tickled pink by this video. It does explain some of our conversations at DaveCON. And there are a lot of truth to what you say. Small note you did kind of skip over the Ironside rules that eventually became Don’t Give Up the ship that Arneson used shortly after giving up the Domesday vol 5 rules because of player revolt and used, but you did bring that up later. it wasn’t a total drop of those rules. Of course they were elements pulled still referenced to, but the vast majority of the actual combat was dropped for what Dave was working. I would definitely say that Dave and David were both about ease of combat and not really getting it muddled down. And today’s combat systems are onerous. And I know I talk to you a little bit about the missing rule book, the one that explains gameplay and role-playing. a lot of people have made assumptions about what us playing, and decide to redefine it as Larping or not really realizing the role-play is you being somebody else in both behavior and attitude. That’s the role-playing. The character background and other information is just to help you get into the mood or mental state and is not necessary. Rule of order you are correct different people handled it differently. For example, I believe Gary loved the idea of simultaneous combat that both sides are occurring at the same time I could be wrong. that is how old people in Minnesota explain to me and having not played with Gary. I can’t attest to it. But I know more about pretty much getting everyone to clear their actions and then working out the results based upon what the creatures were doing or NPCs
in terms of the leveling, I have to kind of point out that Gary is kind of correct about the power creep that was constantly occurring in dungeons and dragons. When I was first introduced to the game, I was playing with some players who might’ve gotten up to 10th level , and they were up against players who were against player versus player and claimed to googolplex the power googolplex the power googolplex. And the runner-up was at 6000th level. it was ridiculous.
in the current version of fifth edition, it’s not uncommon to see players make 40th level and not even make it to the dungeon yet. I really have a problem with this by the time you make it to the dungeon you’re way overpowered. Players just don’t have a comprehension to understand what that’s about. Trouble is I would also say that Gary made rules that made it pretty easy for players to power creep and later additions only made it worse especially with the roll three drop the lowest.
everyone’s game I played in. We do not consider the players the heroes. We consider them to be common folk who hope to become hero by adventuring and not dying.
I don't think it was realism they were shooting for in combat. I believe they were looking for an objective way to adjudicate the process of combat, so the PCs/players get a fair chance to utilize planning and strategy without get an off the cuff decision of the GM that "oh, the monster hit you before you acted" based on a snap judgement.
I am having trouble with the title of this video as it does not seem to match what you are saying..perhaps influence is the wrong word. Maybe it should be called California vs. Midwest...Early variations of D&D.
It took players a long time to realize D&D wasn’t a wargame. You rarely fight men-vs-men. What's the “weapon speed factor” of a troll's claw?
On the contrary, I think the richness in choices and options in 1e that greatly impact gameplay, and interconnected puzzles like encumbrance, illumination, food and water, and overland travel, which all fade in importance by mid-level as PCs gain magic that eases or negates these burdens, shows that 1e is extremely good at offering a lot to chew on at levels 1-7. This is the level range where dungeon delving is super common, and that makes certain things important like weapon speed, space required, Thief skills, breaking doors, surprise and encounter distance, etc. This is NOT just "roleplaying", this is a wargame about a small team of specialists assaulting a fortified dungeon environment. Although of course there is important parelying with creatures, and negotiating with NPCs especially in town, and I would again characterize these as interactions with game elements rather than purely roleplay. There are wins and losses in them, and something to gain, the choice to ignore it entirely. So it's war in the sense that diplomacy is prelude to war. Only interactions between PC team members are really purely roleplaying.
As for enemies, the humanoids and undead up through 4 HD are human-scale and work a lot like man-to-man combat, and these enemies are fairly common. Your encounter tables are also going to include a lot of actual humans and demihumans. Maybe not in a dungeon, but certainly in town and the "close" wilderness. And nonhuman enemies like Stirges and Giant Rats don't operate any differently from humans unless you actually use the WvAC rules (almost none did or do) and speed factor for monsters is generally as unarmed fighting ... because they're unarmed. 2e introduced SF for large monsters so you could use that if you like. Rules pottage can make for a good D&D game.
Then at mid-level the DM's creativity becomes much more important in creating new challenges, although the game supports things like seafaring and underwater adventure, aerial adventure, and deep wilderness adventure. Monstrous monsters come into play more frequently that don't wear armor or wield weapons, and magic weapons have faster weapon speeds approaching 0, and being in larger dungeons or outdoors gives more room to fight and opens up the tactical possibilities and expectations - and lacking the security of impassible walls to guard your flanks can be a big change to the wargame. And the rewards on the more valuable and high-end range of the magic item lists start becoming a lot more available. The mid-level spell options start becoming really useful on a large battlefield.
Too, you can imagine a wargames setup where there are nonhuman elements that don't use exactly the same rules. A tank or artillery piece in a WW2 game, or a high-altitude drone spotter who calls in airstrikes in a modern setting. A medieval wargame could include siege engines, fortifications, men-at-arms, sappers, and the construction and hiring of the same - and 1e DMG devotes large sections to this.
And finally at high level, again DM creativity is impactful, but premade challenges like plane travel become available. There are a lot of really powerful magic items that players can still salivate over, high-level spells, etc. and these are generally modifications to the same rules used before, and applicable in a dungeon or wilderness adventuring environment.
What we don't see is support for mystery-investigation, extensive rules for negotiation and interrogation, seduction, PC lineage, political jockeying, growth in PC personalities and achievement of emotional objectives, etc. It is not a game about those things! In fact, with magic like Charm Person and ESP it becomes trivial to bypass a lot of these situations and centering an adventure or campaign around them will create rather stale gameplay. The DM can always ban those powers, such as by making the vital NPCs immune to them, but that is a campaign-level change and doesn't affect what the published game is about. These roleplaying elements should exist in the D&D wargame, just not as the central pillars. For a game that is truly about these things, see Burning Wheel.
So, I would suggest instead that it will take 5e players a very long time to realize that D&D is almost completely a wargame in which you are very much encouraged to roleplay.
The whole thing about Gary changing his mind etc is pretty to explain. OD&D Gary was Chill Hobbyist Gary. AD&D Gary was asshole corporate cocaine fiend Gary.
Always great content but youtube makes it impossible to watch by keep bombarding me with 30-40 second Ads. RUclips is a premium only service nowadays. Only creator's can change this trend by turning off midroll Ads, take a short term hit on revenue and give youtube back to the people.