From: johnf@apollo.hp.com (John Francis)
Subject: Re: The TSR Trap
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 17:37:40 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Oct16.024015.7473@ncsu.edu> dcgonyie@eos.ncsu.edu (Dwaine Gonyier) writes:
>
>I think TSR has gone a little overboard with the 2nd edition.
>The updated rules are easier to understand and function better (except for
>wrestling, of course :)  ). But do we really need a handbook for dwarves, 
>elves, fighters, etc? I am sure avid dwarf players would love having that
>kind of detailed info, but I pity the dm who has players with every race and
>class who insist on using the handbooks.

Players who *insist* on using the handbooks?  Not in my dungeon they don't.
I *allow* them to use the handbooks, but I have the final say on what goes.

>                                          I pity him (her) because a good 
>rule of thumb for dms is to read and approve material to be used in their
>campaigns. To have to read that many guidebooks is painful, but it must be
>done to watch over sneaky players who might come up with strange new rules 
>and abilities for their characters that you might not be aware of ("But it's
>in the handbook!  Dwarves can do that.  This ability also increases with each
>level...").

Just because it says so in the book doesn't mean it's true in *my* world.

>                 Even though the dm has final say as to what abilities each
>character can have in respect to race and class,

Precisely.  And the DM also has the final say in all other situations.

>                                                 players might feel cheated
>out of special priviliges and abilities for their characters that were
>revealed in these handbooks.

It depends on whether you regard gaming as a competition between the players
and the GM, or as a cooperative venture. I try to work with my players as a
team, and try to come to an agreement about rules and abilities. If John Q.
Paladin wants a warhorse because he will look more impressive mounted on a
fine steed, and so will be better able to glorify his deity in the eyes of
the local populace, I'll probably let him go on a quest to find one (mind
you, he'll probably have to do penance to atone for his vanity :-)
If he wants a warhorse because:

  o It says he can have one on page xxx.

  o A warhorse lets him kill two extra Orcs per round, giving extra EP

then he'll be out of luck.  If I feel that an ability or a magic spell
are destructive to game balance then I'll tell the player, and we'll
try to work out an alternative that satisfies us both.  I try to be fair
and even-handed about it, so my players don't generally feel cheated.

>I would be more comfortable with a 'handbook for classes' and a 'handbook
>for races'.   I'm sure TSR could give a fairly good summary of new abilies and
>so on for all races, classes, or whatever in one book for each category.

Ah, but that would require the purchaser to *think*.

>The 1st edition was considered complete if you had access to only three
>books: DMs Guide, Players Handbook. & the Monster Manual.

You seem to be confused here. The official TSR line is that the 2nd edition
is complete with just the three volumes you mention - all other handbooks
are merely optional extras to be added at the discretion of the DM.
This is in contrast to the 1st edition, where the official rule set (where
"official" means as defined by TSR at gaming events and in Dragon magazine)
included vast amounts of additional crud - most notably the extra character
classes from the Unearthed Arcana.  Many gamers regard this as the curse of
Gygax.  But I digress . . . .
Those who regard 1st edition as complete with just three books are going
against the official TSR line - those who regard 2nd edition as complete
with the corresponding three books are following the TSR guidelines.
From my perspective that makes the 2nd edition a definite improvement!

> In the 2nd edition, how can you ever have a 'complete' set if TSR comes
>out with a new guide for this or a handbook for that every month? Sure its
>great to add to a campaign,but there is such thing as overload, folks. I'm
>sure most dms can't keep track of every new rule, situation, and protocal
>spelled out in about 7 or 8 books!  Even if it was possible, that kind of
>book keeping would surely lead to burnout...


-- 
John Francis                                 johnf@apollo.hp.com
with 9 cats to feed, I don't have time to think up a clever .sig
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd