Yesterday, D&D was such an easy game to play…

I’ve been going through a lot of my old papers in preparation for a move to a new apartment, and in the process, I’ve been reducing the *amount* of paper I have, working on a better method of organizing what I want to keep, and I’ve taken stock of what I’ve done, what I’ve worked on over the years.

One place where I cut a *huge* amount of paper was from my DEEP SEKH records. I had a tendency to print out multiple extra copies of each character sheet (there were over sixty characters at its peak) and use only the most current versions, which I kept continuously tweaking, honing, and replacing between conventions.

Now I really only want copies for posterity – I have a couple copies of each character from the major iterations of the game (first and last), the fancy ones I did in color, and so forth. None of the ugly, cramped ones I tried to develop during the interim really stuck around – I know now how I’d do things differently.

Doing this though, made me wonder about how much I’d “left behind” – how much had fallen by the wayside, and how much I would have liked to keep around. In the back of my mind, I have this Gordian Knot I’m working through of how to reunite old concepts with new ones, and bring everything together on the same page.

It got me thinking on another subject I want to discuss, which has to do with difference in character builds, and what it really means to have those differences. I remember one of the things I struggled with originally making over fifty characters using Third Edition, is there was very little way to differentiate statistically.

Everything was a matter of how good their primary statistics were, and every character’s primary statistics were essentially the same. If everyone has an eighteen in their best ability score, then everyone has a plus-four bonus to attack, no matter what the attack is – they actually turned out to be rather homogenous.

Anyway, most of that I will save to discuss later.