OSR What Do You prefer 1E vs 2E

[Voadam]

Being a level or two behind is definitely something you always feel if you're a spellcaster. And the way HP work and with the lower overall HP totals in 1E compared to WotC-era, you're always significantly squishier, especially once the single-classed PCs cross a saving throw advancement threshold. This is a bit variable, though, depending what level you're at. Obviously you always feel weaker when the single-classes PCs have just crossed an important advancement threshold.

Not always significantly squishier.

A Multiclassed Magic-User getting half his hit points from a higher HD (d6/d8/d10) was usually equal or stronger on hp than a straight magic user's d4 increase from one level advancement. In 1e they also got to cast in the armor allowed for their multiclass so they could have a significantly better AC. The Cleric-MU casting magic missiles in plate mail was usually less squishy than a straight MU of the same xp when a rain of arrows targeted them.

 

[Zardnaar]

Not always significantly squishier.

A Multiclassed Magic-User getting half his hit points from a higher HD (d6/d8/d10) was usually equal or stronger on hp than a straight magic user's d4 increase from one level advancement. In 1e they also got to cast in the armor allowed for their multiclass so they could have a significantly better AC. The Cleric-MU casting magic missiles in plate mail was usually less squishy than a straight MU of the same xp when a rain of arrows targeted them.

Half hit dice rounded down and level or two behind often resulted n fewer HP.

Not always though.

 

[James Gasik]

It turns out that the way hit points for multiclass characters was intended to be handled was never clearly stated in the books. It wasn't until Dragon #243 (printed in 1998!) that we got any kind of answer.

What I will say about multiclassing is, if there's any class that you really shouldn't single-class, it's Thief. Given the benefits of very high Dexterity (where an 18 lets you basically function as if you are +1 level!), you likely should be considering Elf or Halfling anyways, and being down a level compared to a single-classed Thief is well worth it when you consider the potential improvements to survivability, utility, and combat prowess. Most Thieves aren't giving their party much benefit from their Thieving abilities at low levels anyways, with almost any check starting at under 50% at 1st level, and failed checks often leading to doom for the Thief. In combat, the only character worse off than you is the Wizard. Backstab is an unrealizable dream (1), so your best bet is to grab a shortbow and fire twice a round for your d6 damage.

The benefits of a second class here are huge- if you're part Fighter, you probably still don't want to go into melee, but you could upgrade that d6 bow shot to a d8, have likely better hit points, and eventually better saves. If you're part Mage, well, you're not going to be hardier, but the utility gain is immense for your role- eschew armor for better Thieving abilities with Mage Armor, create distractions with illusions, turn Invisible, be able to use scrolls or wands much faster- there's a lot to consider.

And then there are some strange multiclass combos that will cost you that +1 Dexterity- Gnomes can be Thief/Priests, which suddenly adds a few healing spells to the party (always welcome) and some crazy things can be done if you're a Mythos Priest (2). And the Complete Bard's Handbook offers some Thief/Bard options, which not only results in extra utility, but a second source of points for Climb Walls, Detect Noise, Read Languages, and Pick Pockets! I'll mention Thief/Psion, though I've never seen one played.

(1): depending on how strict your DM is with the rules. I've encountered (even on this forum) people who claim Thieves are backstabbing machines, constantly ganking enemies, despite the potential minefield of rules that the DM can easily use to prevent this ability from functioning. YMMV.

(2): in the past, when I've talked about this, I've encountered some DM's who claim that this shouldn't be allowed, as, in their minds, a Mythos Priest is some kind of specialization, and Cleric =/= Priest. It's worth noting that in later TSR books, like the Complete Planeswalkers Handbook, it specifically states races can be multiclass Priests, not Clerics. Again, YMMV.

 

[cbwjm]

(2): in the past, when I've talked about this, I've encountered some DM's who claim that this shouldn't be allowed, as, in their minds, a Mythos Priest is some kind of specialization, and Cleric =/= Priest. It's worth noting that in later TSR books, like the Complete Planeswalkers Handbook, it specifically states races can be multiclass Priests, not Clerics. Again, YMMV.

I'm pretty sure that specialist priests could multiclass, normally if they couldn't then it would mention it in their description, unless I'm misremembering. I'm also more familiar with the FR specialist priests so maybe in legends and lore it wasn't mentioned.

 

[James Gasik]

I'm pretty sure that specialist priests could multiclass, normally if they couldn't then it would mention it in their description, unless I'm misremembering. I'm also more familiar with the FR specialist priests so maybe in legends and lore it wasn't mentioned.

So TSR flip-flopped on this a lot. First you have to realize that "specialty priests" as presented in the PHB were a bit different than "priests of a specific mythos" (Legends & Lore, Monstrous Mythology, Faiths & Avatars, et. al.)...with one major exception, the Druid.

And the Druid had it's own multiclass rules that differed from the Cleric. Further, a lot of mythos priests either gained abilities of another class (Coyote giving you all Thief abilities up to level 10) or forced you to multiclass, even if human (priests of Isis are all Priest/Mages).

My DM allowed me to be a Priest (Flandal Steelskin)/Fighter, but I've encountered other DM's who wouldn't since Monstrous Mythology doesn't explicitly say you can (especially since other gods in the same book say things like "oh yeah, this god has a lot of priest/thief followers").

 

[Lanefan]

Eh. Kind of a tricky thing to measure. Usually having fewer and lower-level spells, worse attacks and saves, and worse HP than a single-classed character of your same XP and stats is a significant cost for the flexibility, especially given that you can still only do one thing at a time.

Your choices as to what that "one thing" are, however, are often vastly greater.

Being a level or two behind is definitely something you always feel if you're a spellcaster.

Not so much IME, but that could be because there's always level variance in our parties anyway.

And the way HP work and with the lower overall HP totals in 1E compared to WotC-era, you're always significantly squishier, especially once the single-classed PCs cross a saving throw advancement threshold. This is a bit variable, though, depending what level you're at. Obviously you always feel weaker when the single-classes PCs have just crossed an important advancement threshold.

Perhaps, though as we leave most combat and save mechanics to the DM we-as-players aren't often aware of this gap. (and for my own games, I've smoothed out those progressions where it makes sense to do so)

You're right about the squishy aspect, though - unless you rock a high Con score (and have Fighter as one of your classes) hit points can be hard to come by.

 

[Lanefan]

Half hit dice rounded down and level or two behind often resulted n fewer HP.

Not always though.

We've always just done it that the player rolls a die sized to the average between the two (or three) classes' hit dice whenever the leading class bumps (or both, if the player sets it up such that the classes bump in lockstep).

So, a F-MU (d10/d4) would roll a d7. A F-T (d10/d6) would roll a d8; a T-MU (d6/d4) a d5, and so on.

 

[Celebrim]

What I will say about multiclassing is, if there's any class that you really shouldn't single-class, it's Thief.

Certainly true, although what is truer is that Thief is so bad as a class that you really shouldn't ever be a thief. In 3e terms, the 1e/2e Thief is a "tier 7" type class that is so bad that it's not even good at the thing that is it's schtick. If I were to modernize 1e, one of the first things on the agenda would be completely redoing in the Thief class to make it something other than a trap.

But certainly, if you are going to play Thief for the style points, then you should never play it single class. It's always either a multi-class or dual class option - either as a thief/M-U or if you have some wiggle room from UA or a generous GM a fighter/thief, or as either a second class after obtaining high level fighter (albeit cleric is far more powerful as an option), or as a dip class before jumping into fighter, or as a stepping stone to bard.

How bad is the thief? Well, it's so bad that even if every single attack was a backstab, it still wouldn't be worth playing.

 

[Lanefan]

Certainly true, although what is truer is that Thief is so bad as a class that you really shouldn't ever be a thief. In 3e terms, the 1e/2e Thief is a "tier 7" type class that is so bad that it's not even good at the thing that is it's schtick. If I were to modernize 1e, one of the first things on the agenda would be completely redoing in the Thief class to make it something other than a trap.

Maybe this is true at lower levels, but I'm playing a high-level single-class Thief (in a higher-level party - she's the lowest) right now and she's been doing OK so far.

The one significant change we've made to Thieves in our system is to expand their weapons-allowable list a bit; otherwise they're still fairly close to the 1e-as-written version.

But certainly, if you are going to play Thief for the style points, then you should never play it single class. It's always either a multi-class or dual class option - either as a thief/M-U or if you have some wiggle room from UA or a generous GM a fighter/thief, or as either a second class after obtaining high level fighter (albeit cleric is far more powerful as an option), or as a dip class before jumping into fighter, or as a stepping stone to bard.

How bad is the thief? Well, it's so bad that even if every single attack was a backstab, it still wouldn't be worth playing.

If one only focuses on combat, this would be true. But when playing a Thief, combat should be way down the list of what you want to do. Sneaking, scouting, spying, searching - that's what you're there for*. Any meaningful contributions to combat are just a bonus.

* - and looting, if you're that kind of Thief.

 

[James Gasik]

Certainly true, although what is truer is that Thief is so bad as a class that you really shouldn't ever be a thief. In 3e terms, the 1e/2e Thief is a "tier 7" type class that is so bad that it's not even good at the thing that is it's schtick. If I were to modernize 1e, one of the first things on the agenda would be completely redoing in the Thief class to make it something other than a trap.

But certainly, if you are going to play Thief for the style points, then you should never play it single class. It's always either a multi-class or dual class option - either as a thief/M-U or if you have some wiggle room from UA or a generous GM a fighter/thief, or as either a second class after obtaining high level fighter (albeit cleric is far more powerful as an option), or as a dip class before jumping into fighter, or as a stepping stone to bard.

How bad is the thief? Well, it's so bad that even if every single attack was a backstab, it still wouldn't be worth playing.

My most successful Thief is a dual-classed Thief, where I started as a Fighter, and then once I wasn't getting anything useful out of Fighter anymore, I switched over and started playing with lower level characters. I thought it was pretty cool, but then I realized, that coolness wasn't because I was a Thief- it was because of my bloated hit point total and the various magic items I'd collected to make me a better Thief, lol. Like, of course I could move silently when I had Boots of Elvenkind! And when I did get to backstab, it was my high Strength, not the damage multiplier, that did most of the work! Once I was once again higher level, I didn't need to use my toolkit often either- the point in the game where Thieving abilities shine the brightest is at the low levels when you might have a 35% chance to succeed, lol.

I'd have been better off dual-classing into Bard.

But at low levels, there's really no way around needing a Thief. But being a single-classed Thief is a particularly miserable experience.