What do you dislike about 1E?

[The_Gunslinger658]

Wow! I knew 1E had some problems, but dude, you really bring it all out into the open. So the question begs, how did such a game become so popular? diaglo? Bullure?



Scott

 

[Crothian]

Wow! I knew 1E had some problems, but dude, you really bring it all out into the open. So the question begs, how did such a game become so popular? diaglo? Bullure?

What are seen as problems now were not problems then. Even the psionics would only be used by people who wanted them and those that didn't could easily ignore them.

 

[diaglo]

Wow! I knew 1E had some problems, but dude, you really bring it all out into the open. So the question begs, how did such a game become so popular? diaglo?

read my first post to this thread.


players wanted power ups.

they wanted to invent new things and get new powers....

new spells, new magic items, new skills, new powers....

but they wanted them codified for everyone to use in tournament...

 

[GrayLinnorm]

One thing I don't miss about 1e is that 1e dragons were too wimpy. A red dragon, which is supposed to be one of the toughest enemies in the game, could only have up to 88 hit points! And originally, a dragon's breath weapon inflicted damage equal to its hit points --- which means that as the dragon takes more damage, its breath weapon becomes less effective. Thankfully, they fixed that.

Oh, and I didn't like weapon types vs. AC either.

One thing I do miss about 1e is that it gave additional XP per hit point of the monster, recognizing that a creature with 40 hp is a lot tougher than a creature of the same type with 5 hp (barring instant kill attacks). In later editions, you would get the same amount of XP.

 

[Pants]

Not too the extent it was in 1e

Why not?

 

[rogueattorney]

Wow! I knew 1E had some problems, but dude, you really bring it all out into the open. So the question begs, how did such a game become so popular? diaglo? Bullure?

The demons that Gygax had ensnared to provide his source material were turned loose and went about possessing young boys' minds bending them to the will of TSR. Demonic possession is the only explanation as to how such a hideously befouled game that was so incredibly unplayable could have ever become so popular.

...Or maybe it's because people are exaggerating the problems a tad.

R.A.

 

[diaglo]

...Or maybe it's because people are exaggerating the problems a tad.

hmmm. could be



diaglo "meet me in the steam tunnels beneath MSU" Ooi

 

[Henry]

The demons that Gygax had ensnared to provide his source material were turned loose and went about possessing young boys' minds bending them to the will of TSR. Demonic possession is the only explanation as to how such a hideously befouled game that was so incredibly unplayable could have ever become so popular.

Mr. Chick! I've been wondering where you were! How's the pamphlet business these days?

As Rogueattourney says, the problems weren't problems then. As new games were released, and as people wanted different things from their RPG rules, other games with whole different design ideals popped up, of which 3E is the culmination of a lot of them.

For 1E, the people who have settled on it as their favorite version prefer the open-endedness and design philosophy behind Gygax's original works - in 1E, character development beyond what's in the rules is more of an unwritten contract between player and Dungeon Master. If I see myself as a horseman type fighter, then the DM gives me the things I need to realize that in play, and if the DM wants a combat or non-combat mechanic to work a certian way, then his house-rules require very little revamping of the existing rules, because there is very little in the way of "mechanics".

By contrast, in 3E, if I want to be a horsemen, then I use the existing rules to do this, and most everything I write on that character sheet came from a printed supplement somewhere. There's still a contract between player and DM, but it's more written than unwritten, even if the DM has final say.

The majority of D&D players over the years have shifted from wanting one design philosophy, to wanting another. Those who don't prefer 3E's aesthetic, can get closer to what they want from 1E, or similar products.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Because as the slogan used to say, TSR produced "products of your imagination." Due to differing levels of understanding and interpretation, what rules and styles of play were and weren't used varied from group to group. So, we had to rely on imagination and what has become known as rule-zero. That and it was a different era. Videogames and movies could not match the visuals of the imagination; they still can't but, they're a whole lot closer.

With 3e, the rules are so modular and inter-balanced that removing one thing can seriously affect another. Or there's no need to come up with your own rules for something because it's already there.

A prime example: In 1e I put together a massive quest that spanned the planes for a cleric that wanted to create a magic weapon. Today, it's a matter of getting a feat, the right spells, X amount of gold, and X amount of XP.

Wow! I knew 1E had some problems, but dude, you really bring it all out into the open. So the question begs, how did such a game become so popular? diaglo? Bullure?
Scott

 

[Celebrim]

One thing I don't miss about 1e is that 1e dragons were too wimpy.

Being wimpy wasn't really thier problem. There problem was that either you defeated one easily, or you had a TPK. There wasn't much in between. As a DM, using dragons was always tough, because you knew that if your party was capable of facing it, it would probably be a cake walk, and if not you'd like kill off the entire party.

A red dragon, which is supposed to be one of the toughest enemies in the game, could only have up to 88 hit points!

The thing that amazes me in that statement is the 'only'. If you'll go back and look at my list, you'll see that this exactly fits into one of the problems that I pointed out with 1st edition. Simply put, a monster with 88 hit points was one of the toughest enemies in the game and in fact, there weren't all that many any non-unique monsters with more than 88 hit points - and certainly not in the original Monster Manual. Keep in mind that the the dragon's 1st edition 12th level fighter opponent probably only had about 65 hit points, and the 1st edition 12th level thief would have probably had no more than about 40. The magic-user probably had less than that.

And originally, a dragon's breath weapon inflicted damage equal to its hit points...

Keeping that in mind, exactly what is going to happen when a dragon with 88 hit points and a cone breath weapon breaths on the typical PC party? Even if everyone in the party makes thier save - unlikely considering that even 12th level characters might need to roll 10 or better to do so versus breath weapons - probably only the fighters are left alive and they have lost 2/3rd's of thier hit points. And remember, unlike latter edition dragon's, 1st edition dragons could only breath 3 times per day, but they could breath every round if they choose to.

--- which means that as the dragon takes more damage, its breath weapon becomes less effective. Thankfully, they fixed that.

Believe me, you don't know the half of it.