The whimsical element of D&D vs AD&D

[ExploderWizard]

I think that enough examples of silliness have been provided to illustrate that both D&D and AD&D can be equally whimsical.

The most important determining factor IMHO for deciding on the whimsy level is not any specific game construct that belongs to a particular ruleset. The attitude in approach to playing is by far more important.

In either system it is possible to have an entire party wiped out by a large patch of green slime.

Think about it. A band of mighty heroes dies all alone in the dark because a giant glop of caustic jello fell on them. Depending on how seriously the game is approached by the players this could be a time of frothing outrage (a TPK is sewious business after all) or a moment to think about what happened and laugh ( a party of fictional persona's just got killed by a glob of jello).

Either way, in whatever system was in use, the situation in game could play out more or less the same. The attitude of the players is the only thing that will determine if this was a moment of whimsical comedy or a dark moment of horror.

 

[Hussar]

Yeah, I think that's true EW. I would add that the same group of players can approach a given campaign in either vein, and it's a good idea to have a bit of a conversation up front with the group as to which direction you're going.

Nothing can be more frustrating to a DM than trying to set a mood in a scene and someone starts busting out South Park quotes. Getting the players on board beforehand is really important if you're trying for a more serious game, IME.

 

[Remathilis]

There IS a tonal difference in BD&D vs. AD&D, but its not whimsy per se.

AD&D sets a tone that is (by and large) more mature. By that, I mean a world where there are secret cults, demons, devils, and strange eldrich abominations lurking in all the corners of the world. Its inspired by pulp literature and has a bad reputation of being nasty, brutish, and short. Against this backdrop, whimsy seems almost a relief; kinda like a comedic interlude in a otherwise serious drama.

BD&D, being made "for the kids", has a overall lighter tone. Monsters seem odd but have natural explanations. Demons and devils (heck, even Gods!) are absent, and the tone of the world seems to linger between heroic chivalry (the whitewashed Authurian Camelot of myth) and fantasy-versions of ancient societies. Against this backdrop, the comedy comes off absurd because the mood is already light; its just taking a trip south to silly.

So something that might come off as a mood-lightening joke in AD&D (the +2 backstratcher) seems unnecessarily silly in BD&D.

Course, those are IMHO, YMMV, and all that jazz.

 

[Scott DeWar]

Someone needs to re-read AD&D spell components.

at the very least:
a bit of fleece to cast an illusion? (pull the wool over their eyes)
the odd combination for identify: an owl feather steeped in wine with a powdered pearl mixed in

I always included wacky stuff, but I was also inspired quite a bit by Wormy back in the day.

Wasn't there an episode where a loaded die in a sling shot was used to take down a major foe?

also the death leach on a stick with the ring of wishes, it wished to be able to communicate with all creatures living.

and as for dragon magazine, does any one remember the reworked bard, where there was a conversation between two half orc assasans and the dm, where it was better to take on a brigaed of sherman tanks rather then taking on oa bard from the book RAW first ed?

DM: hey Guido, where did you learn of Sherman tanks?

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

at the very least:
a bit of fleece to cast an illusion? (pull the wool over their eyes)
the odd combination for identify: an owl feather steeped in wine with a powdered pearl mixed in

Many of the spell components in 1e weren't whimsy, but based on the concept of "sympathetic magic" -- the fleece bit is a good example; the physical parallel of bat guano (=saltpeter) and sulphur for fireball is another. The genius of Gygax works on so many levels ...

Though personally I find a bit of fun interspersed between deadly encounters (or even as part of deadly encounters; cf: Jabberwocky) to add to the game.

 

[jonesy]

A y-shaped twig for Find Water? That's more than just whimsical or sympathetic. That's genius.

Awaken had a horn. Yeah.

Human Torch had a burning torch. So basically the spell isn't about creating flames, it's about protecting the caster from them as he sets himself on fire.

 

[Diamond Cross]

Dude, it has a death ray. When you name something "death ray", you are not being serious.

Even if it is truth in advertising.

If something can kill you in one shot regardless of how many thousands of HPs you have, you take it seriously.

 

[rounser]

AD&D sets a tone that is (by and large) more mature. By that, I mean a world where there are secret cults, demons, devils, and strange eldrich abominations lurking in all the corners of the world. Its inspired by pulp literature and has a bad reputation of being nasty, brutish, and short. Against this backdrop, whimsy seems almost a relief; kinda like a comedic interlude in a otherwise serious drama.

This is a good point. In fact, the Hackmaster (4E) Gamemaster's Guide caused me to pause for thought the other week when I found the section on torture. It immediately made me think of the ramifications regarding the tone of the campaign that features such as a given (i.e. that it's AD&D as directed by Terry Gilliam).

And the book makes no bones about it, starting with words to the effect of "The use of torture is ubiquitous..." This brings home how the adult elements of the game have really been dialled down since AD&D 1E, and I had that familiar feeling of dread and reminder of how nasty the world and the people in it really can be at times settle in. Although I wouldn't dwell on it, no light without the dark, and the richest veins of heroics and humour rely upon such darkness and borderline horror being around the place.

Coincidentally, I read a blogger recently who was talking about how the really memorable combats for him weren't in AD&D, but rather in systems involving gratuitous critical hits (i.e. Rolemaster). I'll give him this: I've only played Rolemaster once but I still remember those encounters. (The game design theory side of me knows that such systems lead to crippled PCs, because they sustain many more hits than the monsters, but there are ways around that.) This has further renewed my interest in Hackmaster 4E, because it borrows this from Rolemaster and puts it in a D&D chassis. (Although they may need monkeying with to alleviate some of the "cripples by 4th level" factor...)

This made me think of my own memories. One of the most prominent involves a Spear +2, Cursed Backbiter, some unlucky peasants, and one of our PCs starting a "Spear Throwing Competition". Purging the game of cursed and silly spells, rules and items destroys a lot of the ability to create such memories. It is, for me, the height of irony that things like the Rust Monster are purged for being "unfun", because the memories such a creature creates can be the very essence of fun. I think Hackmaster 4E is on the right track, funwise, by not just keeping the monster, but making it magnetic.

 

[The Shaman]

the odd combination for identify: an owl feather steeped in wine with a powdered pearl mixed in

Wise old owl . . . pearls of wisdom . . . and in vino veritas.

That's exactly what I'm talking about.

 

[Scott DeWar]

I had missed : in wine, truth.