Blending the D&Ds

[Zardnaar]

Thanks for the analysis that isn't as divergent as I remember, I am going with your thinking. Also sorry about wandering significantly off topic into dredgeville on this thread I think that is my fault.

That is fine, and this is just my opinion based on OSR adventures I have played recently. For homebrew and how people,played back then in the 80's I could be way off IDK.

We levelled up fast in the 90's because we used 1E Dungeon magazines which had copious amounts of loot+ were shorter than the TSR modules. Hence level 11 or 12 1E Druid.

We might also power through stuff faster now than back inthe 90's due to RL stuff and a lot more experience. AD&D buff spells tend to be terrible for example but strength is great (Bulls Strength in 3.x terms). The levelling rate would vary by each groups playstyle hence why I used published adventures. Palace of the Silver Princess is a lot quicker than say B2 or B5. X8 lasted 3 sessions this year IIRC.

 

[Dessert Nomad]

Thanks for the analysis that isn't as divergent as I remember, I am going with your thinking. Also sorry about wandering significantly off topic into dredgeville on this thread I think that is my fault.

The problem with '1e was like THIS' comments about leveling speed, difficulty, likelihood of dying, and the like is that there wasn't a unified rule system with a core philosophy of advancement. There were multiple rules that sort of fit together, modules written by companies or people with wildly different ideas of how the game should work, and home games that ran wild with house rules and variations. There really wasn't anything close to a standard game, so people's experiences were all over the place. And it doesn't help that there are vocal people who love to have 'back in my day...' talks about leveling up that go on about how it took a long time to level up and magic was rare and death was common and... Even if that was their actual 1e experience, it wasn't as universal as they like to say.

 

[Garthanos]

my day...' talks about leveling up that go on about how it took a long time to level up and magic was rare and death was common and... Even if that was their actual 1e experience, it wasn't as universal as they like to say.

The chaos factor was definitely something I experienced...

 

[Zardnaar]

I didn't really experience to much chaos but did trial stuff. I had a stable group for the most part in the 90's and again from around 2000-2010 and had the same core 3 or 4 players I could always add to. Finding 1-2 players ot a problem, finding a whole group you can deal with is.

2E we tried a few of the optional rules, weapon speed and casting time was used. Also ran themed games, the all archmage idea was kinda crazy but was still fun (and we died more than a few times, clone spells baby).

The players banned me from using AD&D Shadow Dragon when they went on the great dragon hunt that thing TPKed them.

 

[zztong]

The problem with '1e was like THIS' comments about leveling speed, difficulty, likelihood of dying, and the like is that there wasn't a unified rule system with a core philosophy of advancement. There were multiple rules that sort of fit together, modules written by companies or people with wildly different ideas of how the game should work, and home games that ran wild with house rules and variations. There really wasn't anything close to a standard game, so people's experiences were all over the place. And it doesn't help that there are vocal people who love to have 'back in my day...' talks about leveling up that go on about how it took a long time to level up and magic was rare and death was common and... Even if that was their actual 1e experience, it wasn't as universal as they like to say.

That's my memory as well, so yeh "1e was like that."

And, to me that was the appeal of 1e. There were so many really nice homebrew games with customized rules that supported what the DM was trying to do. The "universal" aspects to the game system were crude, but the games didn't suffer. The local game club embraced customization and collaborated.

 

[scruffygrognard]

"So basically if you made a clone, a new edition, or even a .5 or .75 edition of D&D what would you take? "

I'd try to take the best bits of each edition to make an edition of D&D that is highly compatible with AD&D (the edition with my favorite adventures and campaign supplements) but without the baggage of AD&D (various subsystems for task resolution, THACO, level limits for demihumans, etc.).

In fact, that's what I've done:

AD&D 3rd Edition Player's Handbook

AD&D 3rd Edition Dungeon Master's Guide

The system can be used with AD&D adventures with a minimal amount of work, as the power level of PCs is more in line with that of older editions of D&D. To convert monsters, use the Monstrous Manual and the following guidelines:

To convert monsters:
1. Subtract the old armor class (AC) from 20 to get the new AC. AC 10 would remain AC 10, while an AC of -10 would become an AC of 30 in 3rd edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons.
2. Multiply the old Movement Rate by 5 to get the new movement rate. A 12" movement rate would become a 60' movement rate in 3rd edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons.
3. To quickly arrive at hit points multiply all hit dice by 5 in order to determine the monsters’ hit points. Round fractions up.
4. The attack bonus for all creatures equals the number of hit dice the creature possesses. For particularly strong creatures I'd add a +1 to +3 bonus to attack and damage rolls.
5. Handle special attacks suck as poison, level drain, and diseases as per the Dungeons Masters Guide, pages 70-72. The DC to resist monster's special attacks (i.e. poison, disease, charm, etc.) equal 10 + the creature's hit dice. This DC may be modified for special attacks that are particularly powerful or weak.
6. Spell-like abilities function at the listed caster level or, if that's not given, at a caster level equal to the creature's hit dice.
7. All Proficiency and Common Ability bonuses are based on HD