The mythical ideal of 1E?

[Remathilis]

Now, this is what bothers me about these kinds of discussions. And I’m not picking on you, Jack, because I’m indicting my younger self who said the same and much worse.

Don’t you think the people who came up with those rules, the people who gave feedback while playing them, and the people who edited them all thought that they were perfectly sensible?

Well...

Gygax himself said there are rules in 1e he included as "favors" to other players that he himself never used. (Psionics is one example) In addition, there are elements of 1e (and earlier) D&D that wasn't thoroughly playtested, just kinda created, eyeballed, played once, and sent to the printer. (IIRC, the unarmed system was never really run through its paces and added as an afterthought).

I once asked Gary (in the Enworld thread) basically what was he thinking about cavaliers raising physical stats. His reply, in essence, was "it is what it is". Not the most assuring explanation I've heard.

There are things in 1e that needed fixing for no other reason than to make the game smoother and more uniform (removing monks with they're odd ability score uses or fixing initiative). Second edition went a little too far in some cases (removing half-orcs left a strong-man void) so I think 2e was necessary at its time. I do think though that Cook needed another co-author to aid with his rather dry prose and I think the whole project needed a bit more oversight in its later supplements (Complete Handbooks, I'm looking at you). Cie la vie.

 

[RyvenCedrylle]

Perhaps the 'nostalgia' goes back not to the actual edition of D&D, but the things that subsystems like Skills neatly account for. I, like many of you, have played all four major iterations of D&D. 4E, for instance, bothers me significantly with the 'prepackaged' aspect. It seems to discourage the off-the-cuff theatrics that the GMs of earlier editions were encouraged to do and that made the earlier versions seem so fantastic.

However, would I ever want to go back to the repetitive 7-minute discussions on the finer points of using a 10-foot pole every time my character finds a new room? No way. The pole is out unless we're fighting and I'll take the Search check please. I'm fine falling into the occasional pit trap to avoid an hour's worth of real-time discussion about our party not finding pit traps or arrow slits that aren't there.

The crux for me is remembering the time and minutia that the modern die rolls cut out in favor of moving to the next important plot point or fight and from time to time, put the PCs in a place where this detail can be explored and fleshed out meaningfully.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Perhaps the 'nostalgia' goes back not to the actual edition of D&D, but the things that subsystems like Skills neatly account for. I, like many of you, have played all four major iterations of D&D. 4E, for instance, bothers me significantly with the 'prepackaged' aspect. It seems to discourage the off-the-cuff theatrics that the GMs of earlier editions were encouraged to do and that made the earlier versions seem so fantastic.

However, would I ever want to go back to the repetitive 7-minute discussions on the finer points of using a 10-foot pole every time my character finds a new room? No way. The pole is out unless we're fighting and I'll take the Search check please. I'm fine falling into the occasional pit trap to avoid an hour's worth of real-time discussion about our party not finding pit traps or arrow slits that aren't there.

The crux for me is remembering the time and minutia that the modern die rolls cut out in favor of moving to the next important plot point or fight and from time to time, put the PCs in a place where this detail can be explored and fleshed out meaningfully.

You know, this brings back 2E memories. I disliked it back then, and as a DM I handled it harshly. People using a 10-foot pole like that and searching for a hour for minutae that wasn't there got a "you search the room for an hour and find nothing, move along" comment from the me the DM.

 

[Obryn]

However, would I ever want to go back to the repetitive 7-minute discussions on the finer points of using a 10-foot pole every time my character finds a new room? No way. The pole is out unless we're fighting and I'll take the Search check please. I'm fine falling into the occasional pit trap to avoid an hour's worth of real-time discussion about our party not finding pit traps or arrow slits that aren't there.

You know, this brings back 2E memories. I disliked it back then, and as a DM I handled it harshly. People using a 10-foot pole like that and searching for a hour for minutae that wasn't there got a "you search the room for an hour and find nothing, move along" comment from the me the DM.

So, I take it neither of you used wandering monsters?

-O

 

[RyvenCedrylle]

To be honest, no, there weren't a lot of wandering monsters. DM's or dice's decision? Not sure. I just remember a lot of 1E and 2E games coming down to 'guess what the DM is thinking' which is a lot of fun when there are people and toys in the room to play with. Not so much fun when you just didn't mention that you searched the space 6 and a HALF feet into the blank room because you wouldn't have set off the nerve gas trap if you had.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Nope, can't say that I did. I never found wandering monsters a terribly compelling concept.

 

[Obryn]

To be honest, no, there weren't a lot of wandering monsters. DM's or dice's decision? Not sure. I just remember a lot of 1E and 2E games coming down to 'guess what the DM is thinking' which is a lot of fun when there are people and toys in the room to play with. Not so much fun when you just didn't mention that you searched the space 6 and a HALF feet into the blank room because you wouldn't have set off the nerve gas trap if you had.

Nope, can't say that I did. I never found wandering monsters a terribly compelling concept.

Don't get me wrong - in my youth, I didn't use random encounters, either.

But what you're describing? That's why they're there.

-O

 

[Delta]

Edit: Misunderstood context.

 

[Obryn]

That's incorrect. Nikosandros has the page numbers above.

I think he was saying he was right in his first post - that fighters could do this from level 2 onward.

-O

 

[Lanefan]

Now, Lanefan, a question. You've folded, spindled and mauled your 1e rules to where you like them.

Are you still playing D&D?

::shrug:: I think so. And my players seem to think so, or at least that's what they keep calling the game we play.

Taken in sum, our current game system is perhaps about as far removed from 1e RAW as 2e was, or maybe a bit further (though often in different directions); but nowhere *near* as far adrift as 3e or 4e. Yet those games call themselves D+D also...

One of these days - but don't hold yer breath, it's a ways off yet - we'll get the basics of our Victoria Rules system up on our website (link in sig). Right now, all that's there (in the "Commons Room" section) is a very brief and far from exhaustive overview of changes we've made to the 1e system over time to arrive at where we're at.

Lanefan