1E DMG vs. 3E DMG vs. 4E DMG

[JohnBiles]

I speak as a person who ran 1E for 5 years (1984-9), 2E for 11 (1980-2000), 3E for 8 (2000-2008) and now I've been running 4E since it came out.

In terms of 'nifty things to use in the game and odd detail stuff', the 1E handbook wins hands down. 2E DMG loses.

In terms of 'things which facilitate me preparing adventures quickly and enjoyably', the 4E handbook wins hands down. 2E DMG loses.

In terms of 'cartoons which STILL make me laugh', the 1E DMG wins and everyone else is kicked down the stairs, taking 10d6 falling damage. If there's anything I truly miss from 1E, it's that 1E had a sense of humor about itself that other editions have lacked.

In terms of 'making you a better DM', the 4E handbook wins, setting everyone else on fire for 20 ongoing fire damage.

In terms of 'organization', I'm not sure yet if 3 or 4E DMG wins, but the 1E DMG DEFINITELY LOSES.

In terms of 'beauty of prose', I wouldn't give any of them an award; Gygax's prose amuses me but I really want clean, technical language in crunch stuff. I like his prose better in adventures.

 

[Halivar]

The best DMG is the one you never have to reference at the table, IMHO.

4E beats look-up tables any day of the week in my game.

 

[Gentlegamer]

The best DMG is the one you never have to reference at the table, IMHO.

Why?

 

[justanobody]

Why?

Because it explained the tasks of a DM so well that the DM can pay attention to his players more than needing to look things up in and detract from the game?

 

[malraux]

Why?

If you don't have to reference it at the table, then its either really horrid such that it has no useful information, or its done a great job preparing you for the game.

 

[Halivar]

If you don't have to reference it at the table, then its either really horrid such that it has no useful information, or its done a great job preparing you for the game.

The latter is the case for me. When I'm ready to play, my prep is done. No more look-up.

 

[Carnivorous_Bean]

Well, I haven't read the 4th edition DMG, only the PHB, so my comments don't include that.

However, I'd have to rank the 1st edition DMG as the one that's given me the most entertainment value. I had a great time when I was younger generating stuff with the random tables at the back, and I'd have to rank that far above any of the value any of the others have given me for money!

That said, I still haven't seen a DMG that's really what I'd want it to be. I would like detailed monster, class, spell, feat, and magic item creation rules, with both a 'quick and dirty' creation method one, and a full mathematical analysis version so that if I really want to go into the inner workings of the system and tweak or expand, I can balance it properly against the existing material.

Oddly, the PHBII for 3.5 has something that should have been in the DMG, IMO -- tables of suggested equipment by level for NPCs, sorted by class. Very handy when figuring out stuff on the fly (or even not on the fly). That's the type of material I'd like to see in there as well -- concrete, useful, time-saving stuff, that spares me a little donkey work and lets me concentrate on making adventures.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I more or less agree with the OP, right down to not even thinking about including the 2E DMG in the discussion. (2E was something I more or less ignored as a whole--so I never even bothered to look at the 2E DMG.)

I do think that the 4E DMG as is, plus about 30 more pages of good traps, would have been a definite improvement. Whether or not they could come up with 30 more pages of good traps is debatable, and I certainly wouldn't have wanted a lot of bad ones to sort through.

As for the flavor, I like Gygaxian prose and sensibility in my fantasy. I don't like imitation Gygaxian prose and sensibility in my fantasy. It is seldom as good, and gets in the way of good organization. So I like the 1st ed. DMG for what it is, and same with the 4E version.

I also agree that 3E is kind of middle of the road on the whole question. Monte Cook was smart enough to put Cooksian prose and sensibility in his writing. It's not Gygaxian, but it has its own merits, and is a heck of a lot better than Cook imitating Gygax would be. The big knocks on the 3rd ed. DMG, IMHO, was that it hadn't fully broken with Gygaxian organization. You could make it tons better by simply moving all the prestige classes into the PHB along with a few other minor things that players benefited from referencing. (I'm still on the fence with the 4E magic item DMG to PHB move.) And the reorganize everything that is left, so that when preparing an adventure, you don't need 5 book marks.

 

[JDJblatherings]

Comparing the DMGs between editions reveals a great many differences between editions.

1st ed was the very first DMG and it still covers everything that defines what AD&D was and explains the role of the DM. The dungeon gets a lot of treatment in the host of random tables to cover just what are in the things. Many rules are explained in the DMG that arent' explained in the PHB, there is a layer of mystery between what the player knows and what the DM knows.

2nd ed, was incomplete plain and simple. That's why it is the worst of the bunch. It's only real value was in the magic item descriptions. I like the horse characteristics table.

3r edition DMG is a useful reference work and explains the rules in such a matter the DM can build onto the game and not veer off into incompatibility land all that readily. The dungeon environment is covered very well and some features are locked down in game stats that were never covered in detail before.

4th edition DMG contains a host of solid advice and guidelines on how to be a DM but covers a lot of ground in superficial fashion and shows how different 4th ed is from 1st ed by what it doesn't contain. Random dungeon generation is there but incomplete, encounter tables are there but incomplete. Traps and hazards get really cool treatment in this book. Where did hirelings, ships, castles and followers go? What happened to cross-genre play?

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

2E DMG had some good advice on creating new classes and races, as well as the rules on individual XP awards. Some of this advice is really outdated, but I do miss something similar in current books. The lack of real stuff on the 4E DMG for anyone willing to tinker with the rules of the game had me really disappointed upon first reading.

Cheers,