Why OD&D Is Still Relevant


Since it was probably all over your feeds already (and has been mentioned on the front page here), I won’t go into a great deal of detail except to say that the first edition of Dungeons & Dragons is out in PDF on all of the OneBookshelf related-sites. A big part of the problem with having role-playing gaming conversation online (and in person as well) is that a lot of the viewpoints are based off of what people have read or heard other people say about games, rather than experience them first hand. Many times this is because the material in question is long out of print, and the people wanting to talk about couldn’t experience them first hand. As more older material comes back into print (or made available in PDF form) I would like to think that it will make having honest conversations easier. I know that is likely a naïve idea.

Original
(or Old, depending on how you like to fill in the “O”) Dungeons & Dragons is the transition from earlier wargames to what would eventually become role-playing games. I like to think of this incarnation as being more like “proto” D&D, mostly because while there are a lot of the elements that gamers without familiarity with the older D&D experience would recognize as being D&D, still not all of the pieces are in place. I think the things that aren’t there will be more likely to trip people up.

Let’s talk a little about what the proto D&D isn’t, or doesn’t have, for those who haven’t experienced it. First off, everything from weapons to hit dice are on a d6 “scale.” That means that weapons tend to look pretty much alike, as do the hit points of characters. Fighters (called “Fighting-Men” at this point after Edgar Rice Burroughs references) get slightly more hit dice than Magic-Users, but Clerics are close behind. A party without a Fighter can hang on with a Cleric or two (which is how games I’ve played have worked out).

The other “missing” component is the Thief class. No Thieves ‘til Greyhawk.

Most of the other elements are in place, and “race as class” isn’t yet on the table. There is a flaw, though, in that a couple of special abilities for elves and dwarves refer to the Chainmail rules.

The issues of hit dice and a lack of Thieves are my biggest issue with the proto D&D. The Thieves are a big deal, because between Leiber and Howard, it doesn’t feel like fantasy to me without a Thief. It also seems a weird omission for dungeon-based adventuring.

In play, the sameness of hit dice and weapons damage can lead to a generic quality for things, particularly weapons. It can also create a weird quality of the characters all having roughly the same “toughness” to them, regardless of class. Randomness is a great equalizer in the proto D&D, and your first level Fighter can have fewer hit points than the Magic-User. While it might just appear happenchance on the surface, I think that the random quality is what passed for “game balance” in these earliest versions of the game.

Screen Shot 2016-01-27.png


Now, I haven’t played proto D&D directly in a couple of decades, but over the last few years our group has played a lot of Swords & Wizardry, starting out using the Whitebox rules, and then eventually adding more detail from Core and Complete as we went along in our games. Whitebox certainly was more Magic-User user friendly.

Now, Greyhawk, the first supplement to OD&D, “fixed” these “problems.” This was also the point at which Magic-Users were forever consigned to having d4 hit dice (I personally use a d6 for them in my “old school” games), which can be good or bad depending on your view of things. I get that the reasoning was probably “Hey, they get spells…let’s not go crazy with the Magic-User” but it isn’t a line of reasoning that I agree with. But the nice thing about the game is that it is flexible enough to take a few smacks from house rules, with only minimal wobbling on the part of the system.

And this boils things down as to why I like playing these older editions of the game. For some, playing OD&D or “old school” games like Swords & Wizardry get written off as being nostalgia-driven. Despite having gamed since 1979, I am one of the least nostalgic gamers that you are probably ever going to encounter. Honestly, I killed off enough brain cells in college that I couldn’t remember how I gamed as a kid if I even wanted to do so. But, and this is probably evident in my writing about games, I have reached a point in my life, and my gaming, where I want simpler approaches to things in my gaming. That’s where “old school” games come into play for me.

A couple of years ago, when a long-time friend of mine asked me to introduce her to tabletop RPGs (after years of playing WoW) via Google Hangouts, I started a search for fantasy games that would have a similar enough of an experience that she would be able to recognize it from her experience, while being a simpler experience and getting away from the grid and miniatures approach (that I am not a fan of anyway). I scoured the internet, looking for things that were free downloads (didn’t want her to buy a bunch of stuff and turn out to hate tabletop) and looked over games like Basic Fantasy and Swords & Wizardry. I don’t remember the exact reasoning, maybe because the Whitebox rules were so simple, but that was what we went with. We used a variant Thief class to round out our game.

Anyway, this is a digression but I wanted to dig in a little and show that what I am talking about is play-based. Plus, the flexibility of the game is a huge consideration. Making up new classes is pretty easy, mostly because there aren’t as many mechanics to complicate matters. Expansion for an OD&D game (without Greyhawk being out in PDF at the time of publication) is really easy with all of the resources that exist for games like Swords & Wizardry Whitebox (which, if I haven’t explained well enough is based off of just the rules from the initial OD&D three booklets) to take your OD&D games in all sorts of directions. Barrel Rider Games does a lot of material for Whitebox that can easily be slotted into OD&D as well.

Even if your plan isn’t to play OD&D as-is, there is still a great foundation onto which you can build a fun class and level based fantasy game that does better suit the needs that you might have in a game. Crafting new spells and new monsters is pretty easy. I made about five new monsters before our Tuesday game in just a couple of hours. That time was going from “I have a cool name” to “I have a fully statted out creature.” If you want to check out something that is fairly close to OD&D (but is free), there is Matt Finch’s Swords & Wizardry. It is a pretty great game in its own rights, and our group has gotten years of enjoyment out of playing the game. I really hope that new edition Swords & Wizardry Kickstarter happens.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I quite like OD&D, in all its rawness. I’m not sure I’d want to run it with all the supplements…after a certain point, it more or less just becomes AD&D.

With so few bonuses in the game, few character abilities, and damage more or less the same for anything, it’s much more a game of luck and player smarts.

I think it’s important to know where the game started…knowing your roots and all that. One of my players (who pretty much hates all old-school play) once commented that OD&D was a cruddy (he used a stronger word) game. I think that does it a disservice; it’s easy to judge the game based on how far we’ve come in the days since, but it doesn’t negate the fact that there were no templates to go from, that this was something new, and it caught on like wildfire.
 

Of the two people that are in our group, one wasn't born with OD&D came out (and never played it or any variant of it until our games) and of course my friend who had never played tabletop. Both of them were able to see the foundation that was there, and build their thing from that foundation.

I think the idea that newer is better, or more evolved, can be a flawed one, but I don't think that there's anything wrong with a mix of old and new. I played in a Werewolf game on Monday, ran Swords & Wizardry on Tuesday, and I am going to be running a Fate Accelerated game on Saturday.
 

OD&D has thieves, just steal something and you are a thief. It may seem like sarcasm but think about it, OD&D character before Greyhawk were stealing, stealthing, picking pockets, and and opening locks, just like they were climbing, jumping, bending bars, etc. However rather than have a class dedicated to that with a special ability that gave you the odds you had to come up with a chance of success based on the specific plan, the circumstances and what the referee thought was the relevant attribute.

Of course the actual mechanics varied from referee. The one I know about included rolling 1d20 low, rolling 3d6 low, rolling percentage equal or below your attribute, rolling percentage under you attribute time 5, and so on.
 

lyle.spade

Adventurer
Newer is not necessarily better, as a great many of us decided after experiencing 4e. New Coke sucked, too.

That said, I have the venerable White Box and all those little tan books - the original 1970-something copies - sitting on a shelf in my bedroom. A few years ago I read those rules, with an eye toward running a short story arc using them only. I started with a feeling of nostalgia and excitement, and ended an hour or so later, shaking my head, laughing about how awful those rules are. That, obviously, is entirely subjective. I look at the true OD&D - that box - as like a first kiss...an awful, sloppy behind the gym in middle school or something like that kiss. When it happened it rocked like a Kiss video, but looking back on it the functional side of it was pretty bad. It was a good place to start, but better things have followed since.
 

Zaran

Adventurer
I don't think it's relevant at all. That's like someone buying a Model T because it's easy to work on. Sure it's easy to work on but it only goes 30 mph and needs to be hand cranked to start.
 

lyle.spade

Adventurer
I don't think it's relevant at all. That's like someone buying a Model T because it's easy to work on. Sure it's easy to work on but it only goes 30 mph and needs to be hand cranked to start.

However, in the case of a Model T, if you wear a Steampunk costume and introduce yourself as "Professor Mortimer Smythe III, esq." while driving it, you'd look pretty cool. In some crowds.

OD&D does not afford that utility.
 

If I had money to burn, I might pick it up just as a collector. I'm at the point in my life where I don't want to spend the time to read through a bunch of role-playing game rules I'm not going to ever use, but I assume that the text of OD&D is short enough that I might give it a go.

As far as the evolution of role-playing games...

I think the biggest true evolution and refinement is about standardization of mechanics. I would argue (strongly) that having different mechanics for everything you want to do (bend bars/lift gate it's own thing, initiative its own thing, etc) is primitive game design. By the modern (and even not so modern) state of the technology it is bad design. A lot of games standardized way back in the 80s. It was one of the first things that people started noticing as being a mess. That is my problem with retroclones--replicating bad design. It would be like redesigning a Model T, but not bothering to make the invisible little adjustments that would make it better. What's the point? It was good design at the time. It is primitive and bad design now.
 

Koloth

First Post
One thing that most folks forget is that D&D was created to allow role play gaming rather then tactical board game combat(think Chainmail). Somewhere in those 3 original books is a comment that if you really want to include miniatures, you can use the Chainmail rules. It seems odd that as the version numbers increased, miniatures slowly crept back in, becoming mandatory in 3.5. The escape from tedious miniature combat had came full circle back to a tedious miniatures combat game with some bits of role playing still around.

One of the things I remember most fondly from my D&D gaming sessions was the speed of combat. Entire combats were resolved in just a few minutes since we didn't have to bother with precise miniature movements. Then we could get back to the role playing. The other thing is magic items tended to be rare and unique. None of this expected magic equipment based on level. And they tended to stay useful as your levels increased.
 

rastus_burne

First Post
I don't think it's relevant at all. That's like someone buying a Model T because it's easy to work on. Sure it's easy to work on but it only goes 30 mph and needs to be hand cranked to start.
"Relevant" clearly depends on who you're asking. In my opinion it is very relevant. It provides the antecedent framework of D&D, which all new editions of D&D are derived from. If you're wanting to use the argument that because something is old it is therefore obsolete, consider the invention of the wheel, Greek logic, Indian mathematics, Mesopotamian law, and the fact that in large, these inventions are still used contemporarily. In the same way, even 5th edition borrows tremendously from OD&D: the same classes still exist; you still roll a d20 to hit things (presuming you're not using Chainmail); you still roll damage dice; you can still fight orcs, goblins, dragons, etc.;it is still Dungeons & Dragons.

I'm currently running an OD&D campaign and it's a lot of fun — far more rewarding and flexible (to me) than the modern games of 5e and PF which I ran previously. Is this subjective? Entirely. But D&D has had enough impact on popular culture that to conclude it is not "relevant" is rather dismissive.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top