[1e and OD&D] How did you handle Druids and Armor? Clerics and Edge Weapons?

lowkey13 · Jun 26, 2019

*Deleted by user*

JonnyP71 · Jun 26, 2019

One of the big impacts of the UA was to make parties of a certain level more powerful, mainly through Cavaliers and Fighter weapon spec.

I'm running a 1E campaign at present and I allowed some bits of UA, single class fighters have weapon spec, and we have a Cavalier. I also used some of the new weapons, the new rules on Demi-human level restrictions, the new spells, and a few of the new magic items - I don't see any real problems with these. I did however veto the UA stat generation method and the extra races.

The net effect however of Cavalier + Dwarf Fighter with double spec in warhammer has been that they have just smashed their way through both G1 and G2 without *too* much difficulty - at a slightly lower level than the modules state, ok they had some issues dealing with environmental aspects, but the casualty rate was lower than expected. G3 is another beast entirely (hehehehehehehe) - however they are making slow progress and are now near the end of it.. (after xp from G1 and G2 the main party is Cav 10, Dwarf Fighter 9, F/MU 5/9, Cleric 9, MU 11, MU 9, Druid 11, Thief 11 - with occasional appearances from a Ranger 7, and a Human Fighter 7 (with 2H Sword weapon spec).

But UA has something great, something iconic - and that's the appendix on Polearms..!!! I also think the unarmed combat rules are better than those in the 1E DMG, but that's not difficult.

Ralif Redhammer · Jun 26, 2019

My recollection is that no one in our group used those new stat generation methods, and just rolled on with the “4d6 drop the lowest” method that we had been using and would continue to use for the rest of 2e. The people that were going to come up with bogus stats just claimed they rolled them naturally, as they still do.

When I ran a 1e campaign a few years back, I actually found the UA classes to be surprisingly not-unbalancing. The barbarian, for example, couldn’t use magic items at lower levels, and took forever to gain levels. So what looked to be OP at first rapidly fell behind the rest of the classes. It was honestly glorious.

And I still suspect Gary designed the cavalier and barbarian as traps for the munchkins. The cavalier looks awesome…until you read the code of conduct, which pretty much guarantees an early death.

Dannyalcatraz · Jun 26, 2019

If someone tells you that they have a mint condition, original run UA ... THEY ARE A LYING LIAR, because there is no such thing. If you looked at the book, the binding fell apart.

I may be a lying liar, then. My UA saw too much use to be called “mint”, but it certainly isn’t falling apart.

Plus, I liked UA. COME AT ME!!!

lowkey13 · Jun 26, 2019

*Deleted by user*

lowkey13 · Jun 26, 2019

*Deleted by user*

Dannyalcatraz · Jun 26, 2019

Real D&D playerz (tm) got UA when it came out...

I guess that makes me one of the Real D&D playerz, then.

The binding on those softcovers, tho...

Umbran · Jun 26, 2019

lowkey13 said:
Et tu Danny?

The lowkey doth protest too much, methinks.

lowkey13 · Jun 26, 2019

*Deleted by user*

Dannyalcatraz · Jun 27, 2019

lowkey13 said:
Naw. Real D&D playerz (tm) come in hard.

Mercy is a French word of thanks, not something you extend to UA-lovers.

*pffft*
I have crayon-colored dice older than you.

My Deities & Demigods has Lovecraftian and Melnibonean characters in it.

I played a Drow Ranger/Druid/Magic-User @5 years before Drizz’t was ever published.

In the late 1970s, I would travel 1-2 hours to bigger cities* just to get new modules & minis because the stores where I was didn’t have the latest stuff.

* OK, my parents did the driving