Everybody who played a lot of RPGs as a (pre)teen and turned out okay can tell you how it taught them creativity or self-expression or how to understand other people's ways of life, and that's all good and true. But I'm here to tell you how D&D changed my life: nothing prepared me for a career of navigating extensive, poorly-organized, frequently vague and occasionally contradictory technical documents like the extensive library of D&D rulebooks that I lugged around throughout high school.
I can imagine it, but..... I hope the dungeon master has a good sense of humor. I could be hilarious, or it could be very, very dark.
The idea makes me recall one day when I was driving with daugher, and I did a "What?? Oh.. chuckle" and she says: "What's up?" -- me: "The sign on that building says 'Realty World', but in a quick glance I misread it as 'Reality World'". Her: "Reality World? The graphics are totally imersive and the physics engine is perfect, but the game play often sucks."
Oh how I miss that game. Robot Imana 665C, Clones in space, Daisy-R-YLW. Good times (and by that I mean a lot of shouting, name-calling, insinuations about mutant powers and secret affiliations...). Yeah, good times :)
Reminds me of this post to r/writingprompts somewhat recently:
> [WP] A barbarian warlord, a goblin king, a mighty necromancer, and a dark elven high priestess meet for one reason... To play Suburbs and SUVs, the hottest mundane suburban family Tabletop RPG!
You might be interested in the podcast Offices and Bosses, in which fantasy-world characters improv their way through a D&D-style game for our everyday world. (a spin-off of Hello From The Magic Tavern, which is pretty funny itself).
I ended up in a career that I sometimes describe as "rolling dice for a living" - it's entirely gaming that prepared me for working on stochastic simulation.
> Is memorizing football or baseball stats any less obsessive? Those guys are huge nerds! They paint their faces on game days and argue in bars over obscure rules and regulations.
Yes. Fantasy football is Dungeons & Dragons for jocks - and I mean that in the most loving way possible, having become "a jock" as an adult, and that's where much of my current friend pool comes from.
As I was reading the article I thought about how cool it would have been to play with dad, but I’d be cautious not be pushy towards playing with my (future) children. Sons specially are thrilled to share activities with dad and will surely entertain him until they lose interest.
But kids come with their own personalities and skills, should I have a child who is into sports, I would rather enjoy that with him or her instead of passing my old hobbies. I’d be hesitant to share time in front of a screen though, video games don’t seem to be real interaction.
That's an interesting point. Looking at my own family, any pushiness seems to happen per-relationship, and per-context. For example, I see something my son likes, I remember liking that thing myself, and then I recommend some extension to that thing or say "you like that? Try this!" I mean, I'm not the stereotypical tiger parent but I'm sure I seem pushy at times.
The pushiness definitely happens in both directions though. I have heard enough "dad, you should"'s that sometimes my wife intervenes and tells our kids that, no, Dad is fine how he is. I like to try things my kids like, so they think I'm a kid sometimes too.
Speaking of screen time, I have one son to whom shared screen time is a genuinely motivating pleasure. He just beat Sonic Adventure DC after blowing all his precious screen time minutes on it for a few months. When we play a game together, he howls with laughter and loves griefing. Another son is indifferent about where the shared time happens, so long as he gets equal time with Dad (it's really the fairness and shared experience he cares about). I taught him a solitaire pyramid clone we played with Star Wars playing cards and called it Star Destroyer. He played it all day.
My daughter I'm lucky to bring down out of Earth orbit every once in a while; she is constantly dreaming and I admire that capacity. "Oh it's my turn to play in your office dad? Can we have a dance party with that one song...?" Neil Diamond's "America" for some reason...
The three of us play little narrative group RPGs together. I make them up; they are a little like those old game books that were a tiny step up in complexity from CYOA. The kids automatically project their life approach and personality into their characters. Occasionally I have a little GM trickster fun like transforming their favorite weapon into a burrito, but the tolerance for this varies greatly by kid. Sometimes if your favorite archetype is Hulk and you had a hard day at school, you just need time and space to be an epic Hulk.
I’d be hesitant to share time in front of a screen though, video games don’t seem to be real interaction.
Maybe it depends on the games? A single player game with elements of exploration can be fun shared experience; I still remember fondly playing Super Mario 64 with my father. And for small groups, a session of Worms is nice - being turn-based, you're never immersed in the screen, it's more like a digital version of Pétanque and similar games. The sessions with my friends were a riot.
Not that there's anything wrong with avoiding video games, but they can bring some variety.
I agree that it depends on the games... and on the kids. I was dismayed early on when I bought my boys a used Wii and they just couldn't get it. We all got frustrated and lost interest.
Then I hit success with a used Xbox 360 and playing Lego games cooperatively--where the adult is the helper and coach making it more fun. My boys also love the Kinect and really got into dance and adventure games. So the trick seems to be to try out lots of things and see what groks.
Once a few games clicked with them, they were willing to engage with more advanced games. In one year I went from playing Lego to cooperative Halo and we love it. For balance, we limit what we call "ePlay Time" to an hour a day and make it conditional on good behavior and spending quality time on the board games Daddy prefers to play.
What good games do you guys play, and on what systems? I grew up with a Gamecube and original XBox, and pretty any game that had a single player also had a coop version. Now on systems like the PS4, most games have strictly single-player and online multiplayer. I don't like that I have to buy another system, copy of the game, TV, etc just to play a game in the same room as a friend.
My son just turned six and I got him a Switch for Christmas, it's his first gaming system. Apparently he's still too young to really be able to play the games I bought him, but we have had a lot of fun playing Mario together. He gets extremely excited being the hat and helping out. We've only played 3 or 4 times because I'm not that much of a gamer anymore, but I'd say it has been a positive experience. I wish there were a few more games that he could enjoy on his own though.
I'm not familiar with games for the Switch but the DS had a lot of games that are easy for younger children to play. The trouble is that they get horrible reviews because they're targeted at kids but kids aren't the ones reviewing them. Fortunately the bad reviews mean these games are usually half the price or less of a AAA game like Mario so you can take a gamble and buy a couple.
I recall Mario Party, Rabbids, and Carnival games being popular games for my kids because the mini games were usually pretty simple and easy to understand. The games themselves develop coordination, timing, and problem solving skills that are helpful for kids.
The Animal Crossing games are perhaps a little beyond a 6 year old but they're definitely worth while. The require reading comprehension, resource management, and a bunch of other skills that require a child to think.
Thanks for the advice. The problem is I haven't bought a nintendo device since the super, so I had no idea what I was doing. Looking back the DS might have been better for him. The Switch just looked like so much fun.
Mario Odyssey is super great for the younger crowd. Turn on Assist Mode and it gives you arrows to direct you to your next goal and some extra health, my 9yo is able to manage without assistance. The 7yo is more than happy to be the hat in 2p, even if he does sometimes troll his brother.
I always wondered what the assist mode is. I think I will give that a try. I've noticed that he has fun just hanging out in the city and jumping around messing with things. So I have no regrets with Mario. The Pokemon however was a huge bust, because it wasn't cheap. It looks like a great game for an older kid. But he bought it with his Christmas money because he likes Pokemon, and then we started it and I can barely figure out everything that is going on with it.
The great thing about being a parent is that it isn’t a one way street, where you just simply pass things on to your kid. Instead, you pass things back and forth. You share your interests with your kid, and they share theirs with you. Of course, not every interest is going to be shared equally, but you will both gain new interests from each other.
> I’d be hesitant to share time in front of a screen though, video games don’t seem to be real interaction.
I'm curious why you think that video games aren't a real interaction? This strikes me as a statement someone unfamiliar with the medium would make. I don't understand how you could make such a broad and generalized statement about a medium that offers a variety of games that practically encompasses every other entertainment medium out there and allows for interactions that are almost impossible on any other medium.
Your statement is about as ignorant as someone stating that baseball or soccer don't offer meaningful interactions because from the sidelines it looks like a bunch of people either standing 25 yards away from each other moving occasionally, or at the sidelines sitting next to each other staring at people in the field.
I used to play computer games in my late teens (quake 3 particularly) and even though I have fond memories, I don’t think I bonded as much over it. In retrospect I value more real life adventures (going on trips, nights out, general mischief). In the end there are ‘avatars’ performing antics that cause real emotions, but being in your body, in the world does not compare. Perhaps we simply belong to different generations (I’m 38 btw).
If you didn't bond over the computer games you were playing (in 1999 or whenever), that just means that you personally were doing it wrong (or at least wrong for that purpose). If you were inclined to, you could do things differently going forward.
I think the deepest bonding happens over conversations. I won't try to pit video games against that.
But this thread was about activities one could do with kids. Like D&D, or sports, or trips, or nights out. Against that competition, video games are just as strong a contender (with respect to the potential for bonding), and the devil is in the details of how much you care about the other people involved.
For context, I am a good 15 years younger. I do feel that video games are a bonding experience, both online and couch-coop. I made some really amazing friends when playing an MMO game for a few years in high school/early college (Stronghold Kingdom, World 1, H19 anyone?). I also play multiplayer games as a social experience to keep up with college friends that I can't see as often in person. Sure meeting in person is different and perhaps a better way to bond socially, but I wouldn't discount the ability to bond with a faceless stranger over a video game. There is a certain reality to the digital world.
> Perhaps we simply belong to different generations (I’m 38 btw).
We're the same age. I have fond memories through out my life playing games with family and friends. It's been a bonding experience for me with many people who are close in my life and has helped many of us through difficult times.
I remember huddling around a friend's PC with his brother and mine as we each took turns playing Prince of Persia, King's Quest, and Legend of Kyrandia.
We setup a BNC network in our house and my brother and I would sit in our rooms, across the hall from one another, with our doors open and play games like Doom, Wing Commander Armada, Civilization, and many other for hours on end yelling back and forth at each other.
My friend use to have LAN parties at his house and a dozen of us would all cram our PCs into his Den and do marathon 15+ hour gaming sessions. He'd have something like MST3K playing on the TV and we'd sit around talking about various nerdy things. Everyone brought food, beer and snacks to share. We'd play everything we could think of like KOTOR, Urban Terror, Terraria, BFBC2, Civilization, Hoard and Borderlands.
I remember when DayZ first came out and my friend and I sat in his den until 5am trying to figure out where the hell we were in relation to each other on the island. Occasionally one of us would scream out because we were being chased by Zombies and only had a flashlight. Or the time we were rushed by a squad of heavily armed guys in a car who had us get down on the ground, then threw guns and ammo at us before jumping back in the car and speeding of into the night yelling "Merry Christmas fuckers!"
My brother lives out of state now and several years back he was down on his luck so when a friend and I upgraded our PCs we sent him the old parts which were enough to upgrade his rig to play Battlefield 3 and 4. We'd spend evenings online chatting over VOIP as we played. It was a bonding experience that helped us both overcome a difficult time in our lives.
Recently my father-in-law, wife, daughter, and I played Overcooked for the first time and ended up doing a 4 hour marthon of it. My father-in-law is in his late 70s and never really played video games but was eager to try. The game is easy enough to pickup but devilishly hard but we all had a riot trying to figure out the best strategy for making burgers or soup in the crazy kitchens.
The Jackbox Games are great party games and when we have the extended family together we'll sit around and play them.
My daughter and I probably spent an hour one evening just designing our characters for Gang Beasts. The entire time we were joking and ripping on each other for our choices while bouncing ideas and suggestions off each other.
I wish tabletop video games were more of a thing. I remember a local bowling alley had a version of classic arcade games built into the surface of a small table-style cabinet. The interaction of facing my friend as we played - talking during and between games - always felt a little more personal and board game like than playing console video games (even if next to each other rather than via the internet).
There are lots of board games that can fill that role. Sure, it's not digital or on a screen, but it leads to quality time talking to each other. Actually there's a really good one right now that just hit retail: Gloomhaven.
As a simple counter factual, my daughters and I had a tremendous time adventuring in World of Warcraft. I completely agree with your sentiment that all kids are different and they might not be the D&D type (there is no one size that fits everyone). Fully embrace it though, from video games, to sports, to music, to crosswords, to dungeons. There are many different ways to connect with family.
Depends on the game. Nintendo has some great family games I've enjoyed with the little one, and it's a good opportunity to present him with problems, have him think about what to do, try it, fail, and fight through the frustration of failure to try again. There's a constant conversation going, and we enjoy overcoming a challenge together.
I do worry of course (because I'm a parent and that's what we do), that this time together creates a gateway for games that are less fun and productive.. the ones that mainly feed on compulsion loops. For instance, I picked up Pokemon Go in order to add a little fun to nature walks and park visits, but slowly the walking aspect has faded away and the compulsive collecting has stayed and that worries me. But again, everything worries me, who knows :) At this point I think just being sure to rotate activities regularly hopefully keeps any one experience from dominating.
Familly culture and who kids socialize with plays big role in which activities kids enjoy or find valuable. Especially small kids want to do same things as they see parents do (double bonus for parent of the same gender). Majority of skills are acquired during life whether from parents, teachers, friends, books or from playing around. You can not really manipulate them into hobbies in long term, but you and environment definitely can influence chances.
What does double points for same gender mean. Does that mean you get a doubling of the effect from one gender at the expenses of the other. Is that better or worse?
I understood it to mean that a boy child would be doubly thrilled getting to do things that his dad does. Though I'm not sure it's as clearly true in my experience (daddy's girl/mammy's boy, and all that).
You mean, the structure of our society/culture is such that women (on average) do more childcare, especially of very young children?
As far as I can tell there’s no biological predestination involved there though.
Sure, kids are comforted by breastfeeding (frequent food + cuddles is strong positive reinforcement) and often get attached to it and by extension to hugs with mom, but there’s no reason that fathers can’t have similar types of rewards that reinforce close bonding.
Children are quite literally addicted to mom early on. Its much more biological than simple "positive reinforcement". Nature won't leave the survival of a child to chance, or it at least tries to tilt the odds.
Okay fine, but is there evidence that other caretakers can’t form similar bonds that birth mothers might form by age 3 or whatever? Many children grow up in adoptive houses, or are largely taken care of by someone other than their birth mother, and go on to have entirely normal productive lives.
The poster I was responding to seemed to be making a more expansive claim but it was hard to really tell, so I was trying to figure out exactly what he meant.
My dad was in the US Army when I was a kid. My family is primarily from the Pacific NW, and not particularly religious. When I was 5, my family moved to Germany. For me, it was a magical place, but and I fell deeply in love with it...but Germans aren't very religious, and we weren't while we were there, either. At the age of 10, my dad was reassigned to Ft. Sill, nearby Lawton, OK. You can probably imagine the culture shock of dropping into the buckle of the Bible Belt from agnostic origins. I ended up attending church services with various friends (which I had trouble making in Pentecostania) around the neighborhood, which were filled with fire and brimstone teachings, to include demoninizing D&D, which was lumped in with Quija boards, drugs, and premarital sex. The Southern pastors did a fine good job warping my young mind.
So, I meet this kid named Teddy at school. I don't recall his last name, and sorry if you're reading this, Teddy. We have what would probably be called a "play date" nowadays, because my mom had to drive me over to his house, as it was too far for preteen cycling. We're having a decent time, mostly talking on the couch in his living room, when Teddy asks if I would like to play Dungeons and Dragons. Believing that merely opening the box for the game would have set loose invisible demons to whisk my soul away to Satan's bottomless HQ, I may have freaked out a little and asked to leave. The stigma of D&D stayed with me for a long time, even into my late teens/early 20s, and I regret never having gotten to play D&D, now that everyone's getting back into it later in life. Even knowing now that the stigma of D&D isn't real, there's still a vague, magnetic force present in my mind, pushing me back when I think about sitting down to play it.
As a kid I played D&D and heard all the stories about how demons would posses even the game books. There was a small part of me that wanted to burn one of my books, just to see what would happen (the story I heard is you'd see screaming demons rising up in the smoke). I saved the books, and don't regret it.
D&D seemed POWERFUL back then, dangerous, didn't it?
I introduced my kids to roleplaying and they didn't really like it. Then I tried with Warhammer Quest, and it was a wild success. Being able to focus on something simple like dice and squares helped my youngest focus. Now he plays "Warhammer Quest" with his friends at school - without boards, miniatures or dice, they just roleplay as heroes and villains of the boardgame.
The problem I have now is that these games require a certain amount of preparation (backstory, maps etc) and I'm very lazy.
My wife is a bit uneasy with it. She fears they will become "losers" and "shut-ins" like we were. The "hidden shame" that the writer here briefly touches on, for some of us is a bigger and heavier complex of self-loathing. Which is stupid: the world has changed, this is the new mainstream, and we should just enjoy it while it lasts. But I do have some of these worries at the back of my mind too (in my case mostly about computers, to be honest).
> My wife is a bit uneasy with it. She fears they will become "losers" and "shut-ins" like we were.
By not doing something because of a fear of being labeled as a loser you actually become one.
Since certain age, I couldn't care less if other people think I am cool or not and just do what I like. I would hope to foster the same attitude in my kids as soon as possible and hope they do not grow up as slaves of what is currently trendy.
I've played a fair amount of D&D, but I've always enjoyed other RPGs quite a bit more. There's a huge variety of games out there covering every genre and playstyles ranging from the densest exercises in tactical spreadsheet juggling to storytelling fare so light it's more like improv than gaming. My tastes lean much more towards the latter. Try looking up the FATE Core system, there's a lot less dice and rules but just as much fun and adventure.
One of my biggest complaints about the games I play is the level of dice rolling for even tasks that your character should be perfectly competent in. To me, it breaks the immersion of, say, heroic-level skills in sneakiness when some random untrained person always has a chance of noticing you. I think some of the later versions of D&D "fixed" this with mechanisms like taking 10 and such, but as long as 20 is always an automatic success, that's a 5% chance of failure all the time.
Is this something that FATE fixes? If so, I'll have to look into it!
5e addresses this by assigning much more responsibility to the DM. According to the rules as written, the DM should only call for a skill check when there's _possibility_ and _consequences_ for success/failure.
On top of that, the way they rebalanced skill checks and AC ("bounded accuracy") makes the game feel a lot better. This [1] is a fantastic article specifically addressing those changes, if you're interested.
That's a rule annoyance for me as well that has been mostly fixed by 5e, and doesn't exist in most other systems I've played.
Examples:
FantasyCraft: D20 based, but drops the automatic success/failure rules, so at heroic levels you can have guaranteed success.
Shadowrun 3E: The maximum skill rank a starting character can have in any skill is 6, which translates to over 99.99% chance of success on "easy" difficulty checks and over 98% chance of success on "average" difficulty checks.
Earthdawn: Every 5 or 6 steps of a skill adds one more difficulty level that you can succeed automatically (starting at step 3, where you auto succeed at difficulty 1)
It's worth noting that technically 20 is only an auto-success on attacks and saves. The way you describe is a very common house rule, but it seems to frequently be an accidental house rule (more of a misreading).
Has it changed over time? It looks like what you say is true in 5E, though only for death savings throws. But I played 3.5E. My memory isn't good enough to know whether that makes a difference.
I looked it up in the various books I have on my shelf:
D&D Redbox:
No skill checks, Attacks succeed if the modified value is 20 or higher. So a level 1 Str 9 character can never hit AC -1. A level 1 Str 18 character needs only a 17 to hit any AC. These rules are different in later rulebooks when the THAC0 is introduced.
[edit] Checked my Expert rulebook, and found that the modified 20 always hits is just due to very low ACs not being represented in the Basic charts (In OD&D lower AC is harder to hit). The target number to hit goes up as AC goes down, but "sticks" at 20 for 5 points of AC. There is no special rule for auto hitting or missing with a natural 20 in OD&D. Note that monsters are quite good at hitting with the weakest monsters hitting about as well as a mid-level fighter with mundane equipment.
D&D 3E: Only attacks succeed/fail on a natural 20/1.
D&D 3.5E and Pathfinder: Attacks and saves succeed on natural 20/1
Too late to edit, but thiefs do have skills, and these are d% and always fail on a 100, which is a 1% failure no matter how good. Also, I forgot how bad pickpocketing is; if the opponent has HD equal to your level you have less than a 20% chance of success throughout the intermediate levels.
It is something that FATE fixes, albeit by handwaving for the most part! FATE is a much more story-focused rather than mechanics focuses game, and one of the core concepts is to only play through dramatically interesting conflicts with actual consequences for success and failure. In such a case, a routine skill check in D&D would just be explained as flavor in FATE; if you are breaking into a common shop as a master thief, just describe how you do it; now when you come across the merchant and the necromancer conspiring in the back, then the dice come out!
I would teach your children the value of not caring what other people think. Probably a difficult task at such a young age. But the sooner people realize that grade school is a bunch of social nonsense, the better. Once you've graduated, the real world forces us all to work together, regardless of what we do in our free time. Enjoy your life, do whatever you're interested in, stop worrying about others. Chances are, they actually don't care either. You'll be happier for it.
>I would teach your children the value of not caring what other people think
That's not a great lesson if taken absolutely. Other people can give valuable feedback to social interactions. You should be aware of what people think, and be able to examine it, but not be ruled by it.
I feel like english does not provide us with effective words for discussing this topic.
unless you live alone in a cave, what other people think of you is important. it is exceedingly difficult to succeed in the modern world without cooperation, and people will not help you out as much or at all if they don't like you. this means you really do need to care what others think.
that said, it is common to conflate this sense of "caring" with the deep seated need for external validation that many humans have. most people enjoy being appreciated by their community, and this is fine, but I think it is very important not to be overly dependent on this. ideally, one's self worth would come primarily from within.
> I would teach your children the value of not caring what other people think.
I used to care very much about not caring what others thought of me. It didn't work out terribly well for me — neither professionally nor socially (nor, to be honest, spiritually). Eventually I started to care about others, and I've found that my professional & social lives have improved immensely.
Man is a social animal; he lives in a society. Not to learn how to navigate it is to doom oneself to spending a lot of time wandering in a maze.
Caring about others, and caring about what others think of you, are two totally separate things. The petty nonsense in, particularly in grade school, is NOT something kids should worry about. Because it's bullshit.
Anything creative will never be seen as cool outside of the niche it lives in. You are cool if you play in a movie, not if you write it. You are cool if you wear clothes, not if you design them. You are cool if you play football, not if you compose teams.
It's because it's difficult to assess the quality of creative work. It requires to take a personnal stand.
But it's easy to engage emotionnaly in a demonstration of something basic like wearing a shirt or hitting a ball.
Hence most of the world can do the later, but surprisingly not that many can do the former.
In the HN bubble it's easy to forget the vast majority of the world is composed of simple people. And they are the major force driving the world, just by sheer number.
Lets ignore that "cool" is not really well defined for a moment.
> Anything creative will never be seen as cool outside of the niche it lives in.
In my experience the exact opposite is true. The cool kids back in my school were the ones who were into music and art. It was mainly the lifestyle surrounding the "creative, don't care" type.
Even now that is still the case in my culture. People whose main profession is writing/painting/producing music are "cool". But maybe that is different in your culture.
There's nothing cool about sitting down and designing clothes for a lot of people, while Coco clothes are perceived as cool. Similarly, a lot of people don't see anything interesting in designing cars, but they get excited by seeing a lamborghini.
I really don't understand. Looks to me like I am surrounded by different people, then. I didn't caught real RPGs because for some reason it is difficult for me step in someone else shoes but I love board games as well as PC games. The richer story, the better. All my friends are either playing as well, or at least aware about such kind of entertainment and none of them said a bad word about it. Certainly not avoiding the subject. Some of them even meet weekly, old chaps playing board games in a pub. If that's not cool, I don't know what is.
> The problem I have now is that these games require a certain amount of preparation (backstory, maps etc) and I'm very lazy.
Try Dungeon World, which excels with very little prep. I’d recommend your first few sessions with a GM experienced in that system, though. It looks like DND, but it isn’t, and trying to force that peg results in a bad time.
I've not played them myself, but someone recently pointed me at these programmed adventures[1] that are supposed to require zero preparation; tokens maps and scripts are all included.
RPG has become such a part of the pop culture.
We are now discussing how it links people together!
My younger self would be amazed!
During my youth, french TV depicted RPG in the most anxiogenic manner (suicide, desocialization).
That still doesn't translate to the type of massive hype DnD seems to have attracted in NA.
This might have to do with some competition being available outside NA, like British Games Workshop with Warhammer being a rather big thing in Europe.
My favorite memory was of a session over candle light at my parents' kitchen table while I DM'd* a raiding party through what they discovered to be the internals of the NCC-1701-C Enterprise - I had received the space ship's floor plans (the set in the vinyl snap enclosure) as a Christmas gift some years back, and decided to introduce a few of my younger friends to the D&D world spiced up with a bit of Sci-Fi.
Did you know that according to those plans there was a restroom right behind the main screen? Now I have to go find my set and check my memory...
> NCC-1701-C Enterprise - I had received the space ship's floor plans
There were Enterprise-C floorplans? While I never had any of them, I think I've seen them for the original, the -A version (or the similar TWOK refit, not sure), and the -D, but -C is kind of surprising, given its limited on-screen time.
The marching order for a known threat where stealth approach is infeasible is indeed tank -> damager -> healer -> scout.
Most of the time, you can send the rogue in first, to mark the traps with chalk and then hide in a strategically advantageous position until the barbarian has everyone distracted with all the shouting, body odor, and flying droplets of sweat.
Also, when in doubt, use oil. It's slippery, it burns, and it makes salads edible. Never bring a club. Use a crowbar instead.
Can you tell that I like to be the thief of the party?
Once a jolly Cleric, and a magic-using Elf,
And a mighty Dwarf with a sword plus three
Left their native village - out to get their share of pelf.
You bash the Balrog, while I climb the tree.
First they met a Goblin - with a fire-breathing Hound.
They bashed and they smashed and they scragged them with glee.
Afterwards they searched them - and a Magic Potion found.
You bash the Balrog, while I climb the tree.
The low Wisdom Swordsman picked it up and drank it down,
Changed to a Wolf immediately.
No one could Dispell it, so they headed back to town.
You bash the Balrog, while I climb the tree.
Then a loud voice bellowed, "Who has slain the Goblin King?"
Round turned our heroes; what did they see?
Swooping down upon them was a Balrog on the wing.
You bash the Balrog, while I climb the tree.
"Help," screamed the Cleric; "Ditto," yelled the Elven Mage.
The Wolf whimpered low - and he tried to flee.
The Balrog fell upon them, and his flames began to rage;
You bash the Balrog, while I climb the tree.
They ran through the forest, looking for a place to hide,
Pursued by the Balrog, so fierce to see.
"Wait," cried the Elf Mage; "I have got a plan," he lied.
"You bash the Balrog, while I climb the tree."
Once a mighty Balrog slew a Cleric and an Elf
And a smallish Wolf who had teeth plus three,
Skinned them and tanned their hides...and kept them on a closet shelf.
You bash the Balrog, while I climb the tree.
Amusingly, though I played only very little AD&D in my youth, I presented it to my teen boy and it clicked instantly, and since then for many years he's been an avid DM, buying all the rule books and building large dungeons to trap his friends inside :)
I play with my kids and we love it.
We play with almost no rules, tables, or equipment, so its perfect for a walk in the woods.
It's one of the few things we all enjoy together, aside from video games.
