Back to the future

[MonsterMash]

Are you going to use Chainmail's man-to-man system for combat, or are you going with the "alternative" combat system? Just curious.

Not sure yet as we do have both sets available.

If I only run one character I might make it an elf as they are fighter/magic users in this edition.

 

[MPA]

If I only run one character I might make it an elf as they are fighter/magic users in this edition.

Are you aware that they can only act as one of those, not both, at the same time, and can only change which between adventures?

 

[diaglo]

Are you aware that they can only act as one of those, not both, at the same time, and can only change which between adventures?

quoted for troof.

 

[MonsterMash]

True, and I did remember that. Probably need two characters per player with a two player group.

 

[Harmon]

....OD&D (1974)......

Umm- one question- Why?

The system has evolved. Characters have skills, they can do things other then what their class dictates what they can do.

I started in OD&D and quickly moved to AD&D because it was better. Eventually moving on to other systems then coming back to 3e, when 3.5e came out we integrated some of the rules (calling it 3.25e).

In retrospect to my question- we all owe OD&D a lot for what it did as the first game, but what is the appeal? I mean the rules are so much better now, the system is better, there are more modules, and there are…. sorry I guess I am floored as to why anyone would go back to playing OD&D, seems like going from your brand new car back to your Modal T as a move. I suppose that it could be fun on some level.

<shrug> well have fun, you seem happy about it, I was just curious.

 

[loki44]

True, and I did remember that. Probably need two characters per player with a two player group.

Let the dice decide the class. Hirelings and henchmen are almost essential at low levels.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Umm- one question- Why?

Because MORE rule is not always better. Think of it as -exercising- your imagination rather than just letting it stuff its face while lounging on the sofa.

 

[Pants]

Because MORE rule is not always better. Think of it as -exercising- your imagination rather than just letting it stuff its face while lounging on the sofa.

Or, ignoring the rather snide response above, think of it as personal preference or taste. One man's favorite is not another man's favorite.

 

[Harmon]

Because MORE rule is not always better. Think of it as -exercising- your imagination rather than just letting it stuff its face while lounging on the sofa.

<shrug> to me 3e+ isn't better because it has more rules, its better because its evolved.

In the past I have run GURPs games where the Powers, Psionics, etc books did not work with what the characters had for powers. Eventually we would make the abilities work within the system just so they were defined, so no its not about rules, its about understanding why someone would want to go back to OD&D <shutter>.

Well hope you all have fun. Best of luck and all that.

 

[Harmon]

Sorry if anyone took my question as an attack, it was not meant that way, it was meant as a... Harmon is stunned that someone would want to go back to OD&D. I just don't see a purpose in what I see as a backwards move.

Again, sorry if anyone took it as an insult, but I just don't get it.