Search results

The OD&D LBB's specified the same hit dice type (d6) for all classes, with a few modifications. Fighters got another d6 every level (+1 hp at most levels); mages got another d6 every other level, +1 or 2 hp on the levels where they didn't a full hd; clerics were a straight d6. The only CON...

Does anyone have the "official" Myth&Magic writeups for the Paladin and Ranger classes, or a link to said writeups? I'm really excited about the "new" rpg. Gracias!

Most of the "legacy love" for D&D seems focused on AD&D 1e (tho there are grognards like me who still prefer BECMI, B/X, Holmes, or even the LBB's). I have heard/read a lot of derisive comments about 2e; but I always thought that, at least initially, 2e was a distillation of 1e + UA + whatever...

The "new" Myth & Magic has a class talent (cough Feat cough) that allows a wizard to use a spell slot or 2 to generate a sort of "eldritch blast".. I think the damage is 1D6/ 2 slots. I am Not a big fan of "at-will" powers, especially those that cause damage; I would much rather have...

I'm curious as to the direction that DNDN is taking with regards to the increasing power of spells as a character advances. Let's say a wizard hits 5th level, where s/he gets to use 3rd level spells. Of course, s/he picks something like Fireball which deals 1D6 per caster level. This means...

If you were to build 5e from the ground up (which Wizards seems to be sort-of doing), where would be your starting point? Everyone has his/her preferred version - mine is BECM. But even I would entertain starting from a 1e, 2e or 3.x "base" and building from there. Or would it be...

As everyone knows, there was no discrete "ranger" class in BD&D/BECM. Considering how rangers were built in the Strategic Review (and 1e), that was probably a good thing. The early builds of rangers were way overpowered, IMHO. That being said, there were a couple of attempts at "simulating"...

This is a very sincere question that I hope everyone will take in the spirit intended. I have been involved with D&D (in all its many manifestations) since the LBB's. I suppose my greatest interest has been in BECM, for it's completeness and elegant simplicity, and 3.5 for its greatly...

In 3.5 Unearthed Arcana, one of the (many) options presented is "generic classes". Essentially you have three classes: Warrior (like a fighter with more flexibility in skills), Expert (the Rogue equivalent with, again, more flexibility), and Spellcaster, either arcane or divine. the True20...

According to the BECM boxes (and the RC), race and class for elves, dwarves, and halflings are one and the same. In the Gazetteers, the two began to be separated. Dwarves can be Dwarf-Clerics and halflings can become "Masters" (a druidish class). Elves can be Treekeepers (kind of a mage/druid...

In OD&D (the LBB's), all characters used the same hit dice, D6. If you were a fighter, you got an extra +1 here and there; if a mage, you got a -1 here and there. I know it's unlikely, but is there any wisdom in going back to something similar? It would make constitution bonuses mean a lot...

We have the thread about whether paladins should be spell-casters.. We need to have the same discussion about rangers. Paladins were not originally spell-casters, nor could they turn undead. In OD&D Greyhawk, they were fighters first and foremost. They did have the ability to heal via Laying...

Has anyone ever looked at the Mutants and Masterminds book, "Warriors and Warlocks"? Is there anything in there that might should be gleaned for 5e? I know that M&M left "real" D20 with v.1, but there are some mechanics in the game that make it play Really fast. W&W is kind of proof that...

So.. if we were to take Mr. Mearls' route and go back to BD&D as a "baseline".. Several questions come to mind: 1. Which version of BD&D would we use to build upon? We have OD&D, Holmes, B/X, and BECM. I personally prefer BECM, but that's just me. 2. If we could "cherry-pick" things from...

I was looking through my (growing) collection of OD&D/BD&D stuff, and I came across an article by Ken Marin which detailed his ideas of a RC D&D2. One of the interesting things he did was develop race/class combinations that drew upon strengths of both. BD&D used racial classes (Elf, Dwarf and...

Looking over the history of the Ranger class.. In the original Strategic Review article (and 1e), the Ranger was a fighter with some (relatively) minor druid spells, a few Magic User spells as well, tracking, and bonuses when fighting a "giant class" monster. Starting in 2e, the class shifted a...

Can someone please explain to me the concept of "themes", as different from "classes"? I am not much of a 4e-guy, so I probably am not on the same plane (pun not intended); but it seems to me that this is a needless complication. On my other thread, I've suggested that classes could be...

The more I contemplate the 4.e "power sources" concept, the more I think that OD&D got it right by only having three classes for the (then) three "power sources": the fighter for the martial source (tho they didn't use the "power source" term back when), the mage/wizard/magic-user for the...

One of the things that always intrigued me in the older versions of D&D was how race and/or ability scores disqualified a character from certain classes. In order to be a paladin, one originally had to have a CHA of 17 or more, be human and lawful good alignment. A ranger had to be human (and...

All the chatter about 5e has pointed to a "modular design." I wonder if that concept lends itself to an approach somewhat similar to how BD&D worked with BECMI (or at least BECM). I propose the following approach: 1. The Basic set - exactly what it says; lays out the basic workings of D&D...