machfront
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
"Let's go dark!"
Posts: 2,147
|
Post by machfront on Jan 31, 2009 11:14:09 GMT -5
Ah. I don't know why I didn't think of just looking it up. 1947? So, he's 61. Which means he was 27 when he read D&D in '74 (if he indeed read it in '74) and 28 when he wrote T&T. He was 9 years younger than Gygax. Strange how I always imagined them being a bit closer than that in age.
|
|
|
Post by castiglione on Jan 31, 2009 14:30:07 GMT -5
I always figured that Ken St. Andre was younger than Gary Gygax, just from the "tone" of their writing.
The interesting thing is that seem to have read a lot of the same books which provided them with the ideas that they funneled into their respective games. The one thing missing from T & T that is notable in D & D seems to be any hint of the writings of Jack Vance (which is a shame since Jack Vance's Dying Earth is a pretty interesting setting).
|
|
|
Post by Toad-Killer-Dog on Jan 31, 2009 17:19:22 GMT -5
I always figured that Ken St. Andre was younger than Gary Gygax, just from the "tone" of their writing. The interesting thing is that seem to have read a lot of the same books which provided them with the ideas that they funneled into their respective games. The one thing missing from T & T that is notable in D & D seems to be any hint of the writings of Jack Vance (which is a shame since Jack Vance's Dying Earth is a pretty interesting setting). Jack Vance is a good author, but lord the inclusion of his magic system in D&D has been a bane and a penance on all players for decades now. One of the things that drew me to T&T the first time I read it ( at about 10 years old ) was a magic system that made sense to me. The "Dying Earth" magic system ( in my opinion no offense to those that like it ) is more suited to "Call of Cthulhu" with its alien physics that can not exist permanently in the mind and the ability to store only ( forgive me if I'm wrong here it has been years since I read the "Dying Earth" ) 3 or 4 spells. Just an opinion! ;D
|
|
|
Post by castiglione on Jan 31, 2009 18:15:48 GMT -5
D & D's magic system only made sense to me AFTER I began reading Vance and that's only because its magic system runs counter to all other descriptions of magic in fiction.
|
|
horsa
2nd Level Troll
Posts: 61
|
Post by horsa on Feb 1, 2009 8:26:55 GMT -5
I actually rewrote D&D's magic system to bemore Vancian after reading Dying Earth. All spells aquired a material component, these could be prepared ahead of time to a certain extent. The study of spell books etc locked the final magics into place allowing one casting of the enchantment. It worked, but required a certain amount of world building.
For me the aspect of T&T magic that doesn't fit is allowing wizards to wear armour. What's up with that? Ever since the Hobbit with Gandalf gleefully hacking off goblin heads with Glamdring I have thought wizards ought to be able to use swords, if not all weapons freely.
I house ruled my OD&D game to allow magic users the ability to use any magic weapons. For T&T I allow a choice at character creation, the wizard can either use weapons freely, or wear armour freely. I realize T&T magic is more akin to "psionics", but mages in armour just don't feel right to me.
As for the furure of T&T, well, the free rules will always be out there now...
|
|
|
Post by castiglione on Feb 1, 2009 10:00:14 GMT -5
I think the justification for allowing mages to wear armor in T & T was that anyone could put on a suit of armor. Limiting their weapon choices (and maxing out personal adds of wizards to ZERO) was to account for the fact that wizards have spent their entire lives reading up on spells, etc. without any of the rough-and-tumble "education" acquired by rogues and warriors.
Strictly speaking, Gandalf was not a wizard...more of a demi-God of sorts in human-form.
I believe in David Arneson's proto-D & D, magic DID have a material component and many forays into dungeons were to grab up some piece of magical ingredient required by some wizard (PC or NPC0.
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Feb 1, 2009 19:10:19 GMT -5
From Arneson's The First Fantasy Campaign:
The reasoning behind limiting the number of spells that a MU could take down into the Dungeon was simply that many of the ingredients had to be prepared ahead of time, and of course once used were then powerless. Special adventures could then be organized by the parties to gain some special ingredients that could only be found in some dangerous place.
Arneson goes on to mention the need to practice spells, limited by constitution (potentially leaving an MU too exhausted for adventure); the chance of spell failure; and that progress to a new level entailed first learning the spells.
|
|
|
Post by Mhegrrrim Skulltosser on Feb 5, 2009 22:30:42 GMT -5
Strictly speaking, Gandalf was not a wizard...more of a demi-God of sorts in human-form. Interesting comment. Although Ken states that wizards are designed from Gandalf, I've always wondered about the sword wielding wizard not getting his due. Now your comment makes me think Gandalf is better served as a Warrior-Wizard / Paragon. Which is also strange. Many see Elric as a Warrior-Wizard when he is really closer to a Summoner or strangely enough a Rogue. I am so glad I play Wizards as capable of wielding any weapon but getting DEX and LK Adds in combat. Rogues get STR, DEX, LK, SPD Adds My Warriors get to use Adds from all attributes
|
|
|
Post by castiglione on Feb 5, 2009 22:54:43 GMT -5
Actually, I always thought the Warrior-Wizard character was meant to allow people to play Gandalf-ish characters, i.e. a spell-casting person who could wave a sword around.
|
|
machfront
11th level Troll
Stalwart of the Trollbridge
"Let's go dark!"
Posts: 2,147
|
Post by machfront on Feb 6, 2009 11:28:03 GMT -5
What odd synchronicity. Not a few days back I was thinking how easy it could be to tweak T&T for a LotR game and one thing that stuck out was how the Warrior-Wizards would be a perfect fit for the likes of Gandalf, Elrond, The Mouth of Sauron, the Witch-King, etc.
|
|