D&D 1E Just got done running some 1e

[the Jester]

Yay! Just got done running some 1st Edition; it was awesome. I got to use some rules I never (or barely) used back in the day- things like "longer weapons attack first when someone charges" and xp for gold. It was a ton of fun, the second session of a first-level party (involving the three pcs from session 1 pursuing a group of bandits who stole their tribe's tribute money for a hobgoblin army that marauds in the area meeting up with the three new pcs, who are also seeking money for their tribe to pay off said hobgoblins). They fought a band of goblins with some wolves, killing a few goblins, driving most of the rest off and taking a prisoner, who then led them to a ruin where the band had buried its treasure. Investigating the ruin, the pcs found a hidden button behind a portrait; when they pushed it, they opened a secret door that released some skeletons who were guarding an old prison. One of the clerics turned them, and the party passed through another door that led to the cells and a receiving room. A voice kept calling from within one of the cells, seeking aid, but the pcs were suspicious. Then the turning keeping the skeletons at bay wore off, and I called the session as they attacked the party from behind.

Ahhhh, 1e, I lurve you still. <3

 

[Zardnaar]

Awesome have not played 1st ed since the late 90's but i have been running some 1st ed clones as my 3.x players kind of laughed at the DMG/art/PHB/random harlot table. It has a lot of charms over later D&D IMHO. Had a similar experience running 2nd ed last year though.

 

[Yora]

I am running an AS&SH campaign, which is pretty much the same rules, but even much better, because it's written in a way that is actually comprehensible.
Using positive armor class and attack bonuses, even the players who never played any RPG before picked it up pretty much instantly.

 

[Nikosandros]

I run a weekly AD&D 1e campaign and I still love the game

It's far from a perfect game, but I must say that some of the things that are unbalanced and "swingy" are also things that make it interesting.

I also confess that, event though mathematically it's perfectly equivalent and it's far more rational, without descending AC it's just not AD&D.

 

[Olfan]

I ran a very fun game of 1st edition White Plume Mountain back in March as a tribute to D&D's 40th anniversary. We had never played but went in expecting all sorts of crazy rules and shenanigans, so no one was particularly surprised or upset by anything. We had to gloss over some combat as it seemed really complex and we play pretty fast and loose with the rules, but regardless everyone had a great time.

 

[Celebrim]

Yay! Just got done running some 1st Edition; it was awesome. I got to use some rules I never (or barely) used back in the day- things like "longer weapons attack first when someone charges" and xp for gold. It was a ton of fun...

It is significantly better playing by the rules than not playing by them. Any changes you make in the rules should be consciously made rather than because you don't know what the rules are.

To that end I suggest using the 'Weapon vs. AC' modifiers. The way to do this without having it interfere with combat is to precompute it once. Simply for each character right down their own to hit table with all their usual to hit modifiers figured in. That way they only need report what they rolled, and you'll know whether they hit. In point of fact, this will speed play as players have an annoying habit of reading their individual modifiers up again with every attack, adding several seconds to each players turn.

Ahhhh, 1e, I lurve you still. <3

There are parts of the game I still miss, but I get seriously tired of improvising rules on the fly for things that a system just ought to have rules for. I have a strong aversion to DM fiat in play, both as a player and a DM. It's really hard to play 1e D&D from a neutral judge perspective, rather than from the perspective of what you want to have happen.

 

[the Jester]

It is significantly better playing by the rules than not playing by them. Any changes you make in the rules should be consciously made rather than because you don't know what the rules are.

To that end I suggest using the 'Weapon vs. AC' modifiers.

Oh HELL no!

The way to do this without having it interfere with combat is to precompute it once. Simply for each character right down their own to hit table with all their usual to hit modifiers figured in. That way they only need report what they rolled, and you'll know whether they hit.

Except that the Weapon vs. AC type chart doesn't work like that. Just because a monster is AC 5 doesn't mean that the pc gets the weapon-vs-AC-5 modifier. That only applies if the opponent is wearing chain mail or scale + shield. So the modifier doesn't apply to a monster with AC 5 from thick hide, small size or speed. And it gets even weirder with monsters like giants or other things that both wear armor and have a different AC than their armor "type" grants.

Nope; that particular bit of rules minutiae is too big of a PITA for me to implement.

 

[Celebrim]

Oh HELL no!

Try it; you'll like it.

Except that the Weapon vs. AC type chart doesn't work like that. Just because a monster is AC 5 doesn't mean that the pc gets the weapon-vs-AC-5 modifier. That only applies if the opponent is wearing chain mail or scale + shield. So the modifier doesn't apply to a monster with AC 5 from thick hide, small size or speed. And it gets even weirder with monsters like giants or other things that both wear armor and have a different AC than their armor "type" grants.

This is that part about consciously understanding the rules. For me, this was the recognition that AC included two things. First, 'armor class' itself. And secondly, the 'armor bonus' that modified that to alter your effective armor class. So for example, a guy in chain mail +2 and a dex of 15 had an AC of 5 plus and AB of 3, shifting him down to an effective AC 2.

At this point, I recognized all the issues you just mentioned and I said, "Aha. Let's work out what the AC and AB of each monster is. We don't have to make a big project of it. Just anytime we use a new monster, we can spend 5 seconds on this and another 5 seconds recording it for posterity." So far so good.

And then from that, I went to the next step and figured out how much of AB was from dexterity, and monsters got Dexterity scores. And that was good because it meant that monsters started to catch up with PC's in terms of the advantages that they had (like for example, panthers started having positive reaction adjustments), which meant that monsters didn't suck quite so much and remained reasonable challenges up to higher levels.

 

[The Human Target]

What I think is really interesting is that without you telling us, it would have been impossible to tell which edition you were playing.

 

[Nikosandros]

Try it; you'll like it.

I've used the weapons vs armor modifiers for several years. Taking the idea from a poster on Dragonsfoot, I just used 4 armor types: none, leather, chain & plate. It worked and it added a nice variety to the weapons. However, we've recently dropped the rule. With 6 PCs and 3 henchmen, plus limited session time on a week's night, every saved second count for us. We dropped individual initiative as well.