How much combat features/d in your AD&D (1e) games?

[DeadlyUematsu]

About 40%, though I would have preferred if that percentage was lower. Back then, combat was not only boring but also dangerous! I enjoyed exploration and roleplaying a lot more. It was just safer.

 

[T. Foster]

About 40%, though I would have preferred if that percentage was lower. Back then, combat was not only boring but also dangerous! I enjoyed exploration and roleplaying a lot more. It was just safer.

What he said.

 

[Starglim]

Less than in 3e, I have to say.

 

[hong]

Some day we'll get to play Feng Shui together, and there will be much rejoicing.

I tried to get my group to like Exalted's rules for stunt dice (if you describe an action well, you get a bonus). They said it was too stressful.

Part of it was how old I was. But I recently found my character sheet for "Randimar the Manyhanded", who wielded two bastard swords and whose character development consisted of what he had recently killed. We were in the 70-80% range, ourselves, but the other 20-30% of our time was spent arguing about rules.

Hey, you haven't lived until you've had a shouting match about BattleTech rules... in the university library.

 

[Hussar]

Less than in 3e, I have to say.

And I'd have to disagree with you. Even with a very small sample, we see that most campaigns were pretty high on the hack scale - 70%+. If you look at the similar thread for the 3e campaigns, you'll see the breakdown is almost identical.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

 

[green slime]

Kill things. Take their stuff.
Kill things. Take their stuff.
Kill things. Take their stuff.
Kill things. Take their stuff.
Kill things. Take their stuff.

How complicated can it get?

 

[Aeric]

Now that I think about it, there was actually less combat in those old 2nd edition games than there is in the 3rd edition ones. Of course, back then I only played in homebrews and almost never saw the inside of a dungeon.