Recent Posts

1
The Modern World / Re: TSR's Hunt for Red October
« Last post by bbmike on Today at 06:23:16 PM »
From first look, The Hunt for Red October does not appear like a “typical” wargame.

In 1988, when this game was released, I would agree with that statement. Today, I'm not so sure.
That said, BC is right. Good article!  :bigthumb:
2
The Modern World / Re: TSR's Hunt for Red October
« Last post by BanzaiCat on Today at 04:50:56 PM »
Good article. The game was somewhat underwhelming to me back in the day (a friend of mine had it), but it grew on me a bit with play.

You can combine this with the TSR Red Storm Rising game as well. I have a copy of HfRO myself and RSR maybe in the near future.
3
The Modern World / TSR's Hunt for Red October
« Last post by bayonetbrant on Today at 04:34:27 PM »
Analyzing the TSR 'classic' Hunt for Red October

Is it a wargame if it's all 'theme' without understanding? Or do you need the "why" explicitly spelled out for you?
And are you going to try to answer those questions without bothering to read the article first to understand what the author is getting at? 😆

https://www.armchairdragoons.com/articles/analysis/hfroanalysis/
4
Fantasy & Futuristic Warfare / Re: Diablo 2 Resurrected
« Last post by Bison on Today at 04:20:59 PM »
I recall reading somewhere a similar statement from Gygax. Honestly when you consider how one gained primarily gained XP, it explains his belief on the game. Gold = XP and monsters a distant second. I do not recall if there is an option in the rules but we certainly did not give out XP for good role playing.
5
If you've still got room, I'll give it a go.
6
Is there still room?
7
I can't stay up late on a school night!
8
Tuna, of course, should play.
9
That bridge maybe just be a little to far.
10
Fantasy & Futuristic Warfare / Re: Diablo 2 Resurrected
« Last post by Cyrano on Today at 11:15:55 AM »
I won't do this because I can't bear the thought of installing yet another delivery system -- I barely touch Epic these days -- but:

A long time ago I went to a panel at GenCon on which E. Gary himself was a member.   A question came from the audience that I sincerely wish I'd asked, viz.:  what did he think about "Diablo" and how it related to his vision of D&D?  At the time, I sincerely hoped he'd set it on fire as lacking narrative, character development, &c.  I was to be disappointed.

He said it was exactly what he and his D&D co-creators had in mind when they started the revolution.

That has always stuck with me.