OSR Why B/X?

[Iosue]

You know, I was prepared to disagree with GreyLord and point out how 2nd Edition gutted AD&D of its exploration procedures, but looking at them together. There's not as much daylight as I thought. In fact, I'm not sure someone coming to 1e cold, without experience in OD&D, Holmes, or B/X, would come to the conclusion that it's a game about exploring dungeons (and/or wilderness) for treasure. Certainly not someone who only read the PHB, where dungeons are given as much attention as wilderness and town adventures.

I remember not long ago reading through the 2e rulebooks and realizing, with some indignation, that there's no procedure for an exploration turn, and no guidance at all for making, stocking, and keying a dungeon! Nor for a wilderness map! Pshaw. And do you know how far a 2e PC can move in a 10 minute turn in a dungeon? 1,200 feet! 120 map squares before his torch is even burned a third of the way down. (For reference, in B/X this is 120 feet per turn.) Obviously, 2e doesn't care about exploration at all!

Except, guys, I'm looking at the 1e PHB and DMG, and there's no procedure for running an exploration turn, and no guidance at all for making, stocking, or keying a dungeon or wilderness map. And movement is essentially the same. The subject matter covered in the DMG is essentially the same in both editions. Definitely cleaned up in 2e, but I don't see any real difference in emphasis.

So, now, I'm kinda agreeing with GreyLord. I mean, I do think there was a general shift in playstyle between 1e and 2e, reinforced by the product that TSR put out in their respective times. But I no longer think the shift was especially to do with the rules of 1e and 2e themselves. People came to 1e through OD&D, Holmes, Moldvay, and Mentzer, and so they brought those expectations with them when they played, and it is only then that 1e could be seen as a dungeon/wilderness exploration game. Maybe some folks came to 2e without any prior experience, and to them it was all about plot and setting based encounters. But if folks came to it through Mentzer, the Rules Cyclopedia, or the Black Box, (or AD&D 1e through any of the above) then I take them at their word that they were playing "old school," as much as those who played 1e were. The rules themselves are not any less "old school" than 1e.

So, yeah. 2e is an odd duck.

 

[Retreater]

Basic was about dungeon exploration. It was core to the system. Wilderness travel wasn't introduced until Expert.
So obviously, AD&D was meant to cover a wider spectrum of game experiences (dungeons, wilderness, towns, etc.) The dungeon procedure wasn't a key interest to AD&D design.

 

[Mannahnin]

Except, guys, I'm looking at the 1e PHB and DMG, and there's no procedure for running an exploration turn, and no guidance at all for making, stocking, or keying a dungeon or wilderness map. And movement is essentially the same. The subject matter covered in the DMG is essentially the same in both editions. Definitely cleaned up in 2e, but I don't see any real difference in emphasis.

This is one of the areas where AD&D assumes you've already got OD&D and don't need that same material duplicated.

Same reason that AD&D doesn't include the more playable movement by hex rules for outdoor exploration from OD&D, only the more granular movement by mile. And the same reason that OD&D has the basic parts of the naval combat rules, and AD&D only has the more advanced expansions thereof.

 

[Willie the Duck]

This is one of the areas where AD&D assumes you've already got OD&D and don't need that same material duplicated.

Same reason that AD&D doesn't include the more playable movement by hex rules for outdoor exploration from OD&D, only the more granular movement by mile. And the same reason that OD&D has the basic parts of the naval combat rules, and AD&D only has the more advanced expansions thereof.

This seems weird given how much it's been suggested that EGG wanted to move the company towards making and promoting AD&D, and only kept a D&D line in print for legal reasons.

 

[Yora]

Gygax was just really bad at editing.

Some leeway has to be given because at that point nobody really had RPG rulebooks of that scope as references for how to do them well. But he still did it really badly.

 

[Mannahnin]

Gygax was just really bad at editing.

Some leeway has to be given because at that point nobody really had RPG rulebooks of that scope as references for how to do them well. But he still did it really badly.

Yes, the 1E DMG is massively inspirational, but an absolute train wreck in its editing.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Yes, the 1E DMG is massively inspirational, but an absolute train wreck in its editing.

ALL of 1E is an editing train wreck - and it didn't help that Gygax was so inept at writing CLEARLY. They were looking for misspellings of dweomercraeft when they should have been asking, "Okay I just read the last 5 paragraphs, but... what's the actual rule here?"

I love 1E to bits but lord...

 

[GreyLord]

I get that it's a ridiculous claim to you. You apparently don't remember the widespread rejection of 2E in the 80s by 1E players uninterested in switching/updating. You were evidently part of the percentage which liked 2E and carried over your older-school sensibilities to the newer edition while just using the cleaner mechanics. I expect that you disregarded the changes to the XP system.

Actually, I HAVE heard of this. I haven't met many who state this in person though. In what I saw at the time period, I didn't hear much complaining about it either, and the sales for 2e weren't terribly horrendous where it showed what you state.

In general, those who wanted to stick with 1e...stuck with 1e. You had others (such as myself) who got the rulebooks and then grandfathered the heck out of them (basically what one would call a 1e/2e hybrid. Basically, we used the 2e core rules for new players to introduce them to 1e rules. The rules were basically the same thing if you stuck to the core rules and so there was really NO problem in doing so). Then there were those who dove full on into 2e and all it was composed of.

There was no edition war between 1e and 2e. This only became a thing that I saw people gripe about when 3e came out and people were trying to say that there was also hostility in the 1e and 2e change over. They wanted to make it appear as if there was ALWAYS an edition war...when there wasn't. We didn't have the hostilities at conventions. We didn't have the anger in the shops. People were FAR more respectful of each other's choices overall (though some of the ones who stuck with 1e may have been a little snooty to the 2e players occasionally, in general, no one really fought anyone with arguments or other such things. Most new players who came to 2e didn't experience any hostility from the older players).

There was more hostility between the Cyberpunk and Shadowrun players in the late 80s/early 90s than when 2e came out from my experiences. There was more hostility between T$R and TSR than there were between the players overall. There was MORE hostility early on between the hard and fast Wargamers (which I must admit, I still normally will claim to be a wargamer first, RPG gamer second) and this new type of Wargame that's not a wargame thing called D&D.

Why was this...because 1e and 2e were basically the same game. For those who felt there were changes in the rules that were not really to their liking, they didn't go gripe in the streets or at others in the shops. That it was basically fully backwards compatible was something else that really didn't make arguing with each other make all that much sense. In addition, 2e had most of 1e but had options that could be tossed in or taken out (the aforementioned XP items are a prime example).

The things that people didn't like normally had NOTHING to do with the core rules. They were in relation to the ever expanding line of kits, or the miscellaneous alternate rules that were tossed in with various supplements (for example, I have used them, but never really fond of Kits...I was more of a 2e core rules guy rather than 2e in all it's glory guy). There WAS widespread rejection by many of the old 1e players of things like that, along with the later embelleshments of things like Skills and Powers.

However, the GREAT majority of OD&D players and 1e players that left, didn't leave because of 2e. They didn't have a widespread rejection of 2e at all. Most of them outgrew the fad of 1e. They had other things they did with their lives. I know many of them still, and it's not because they rejected the new rules...it was more that they stopped playing in general because they had other things in their lives they were doing. That's really what it boiled down to.

I imagine that pattern will eventually repeat with many of the players that came in with 5e. It's not that new rules will be rejected so much as many of them will just get busy with other things in their lives.

Those who kept playing D&D were happy to play whatever they had at their tables, whether it was 1e, 2e core, 2e with 1e, or 2e with whatever supplements and add-ons they determined they wanted at their table.

This entire..."there was an edition war between 1e and 2e" that I've seen is something that has only really been talked about since 3e came about and the editions wars that stemmed over that. The REASON 3e started such horrendous edition wars was because IT WAS NOT backwards compatible with what came before, when prior to that, everything was mostly compatible to a degree that conversion was normally extremely easy between different forms of D&D.

 

[Parmandur]

Actually, I HAVE heard of this. I haven't met many who state this in person though. In what I saw at the time period, I didn't hear much complaining about it either, and the sales for 2e weren't terribly horrendous where it showed what you state.

In general, those who wanted to stick with 1e...stuck with 1e. You had others (such as myself) who got the rulebooks and then grandfathered the heck out of them (basically what one would call a 1e/2e hybrid. Basically, we used the 2e core rules for new players to introduce them to 1e rules. The rules were basically the same thing if you stuck to the core rules and so there was really NO problem in doing so). Then there were those who dove full on into 2e and all it was composed of.

There was no edition war between 1e and 2e. This only became a thing that I saw people gripe about when 3e came out and people were trying to say that there was also hostility in the 1e and 2e change over. They wanted to make it appear as if there was ALWAYS an edition war...when there wasn't. We didn't have the hostilities at conventions. We didn't have the anger in the shops. People were FAR more respectful of each other's choices overall (though some of the ones who stuck with 1e may have been a little snooty to the 2e players occasionally, in general, no one really fought anyone with arguments or other such things. Most new players who came to 2e didn't experience any hostility from the older players).

There was more hostility between the Cyberpunk and Shadowrun players in the late 80s/early 90s than when 2e came out from my experiences. There was more hostility between T$R and TSR than there were between the players overall. There was MORE hostility early on between the hard and fast Wargamers (which I must admit, I still normally will claim to be a wargamer first, RPG gamer second) and this new type of Wargame that's not a wargame thing called D&D.

Why was this...because 1e and 2e were basically the same game. For those who felt there were changes in the rules that were not really to their liking, they didn't go gripe in the streets or at others in the shops. That it was basically fully backwards compatible was something else that really didn't make arguing with each other make all that much sense. In addition, 2e had most of 1e but had options that could be tossed in or taken out (the aforementioned XP items are a prime example).

The things that people didn't like normally had NOTHING to do with the core rules. They were in relation to the ever expanding line of kits, or the miscellaneous alternate rules that were tossed in with various supplements (for example, I have used them, but never really fond of Kits...I was more of a 2e core rules guy rather than 2e in all it's glory guy). There WAS widespread rejection by many of the old 1e players of things like that, along with the later embelleshments of things like Skills and Powers.

However, the GREAT majority of OD&D players and 1e players that left, didn't leave because of 2e. They didn't have a widespread rejection of 2e at all. Most of them outgrew the fad of 1e. They had other things they did with their lives. I know many of them still, and it's not because they rejected the new rules...it was more that they stopped playing in general because they had other things in their lives they were doing. That's really what it boiled down to.

I imagine that pattern will eventually repeat with many of the players that came in with 5e. It's not that new rules will be rejected so much as many of them will just get busy with other things in their lives.

Those who kept playing D&D were happy to play whatever they had at their tables, whether it was 1e, 2e core, 2e with 1e, or 2e with whatever supplements and add-ons they determined they wanted at their table.

This entire..."there was an edition war between 1e and 2e" that I've seen is something that has only really been talked about since 3e came about and the editions wars that stemmed over that. The REASON 3e started such horrendous edition wars was because IT WAS NOT backwards compatible with what came before, when prior to that, everything was mostly compatible to a degree that conversion was normally extremely easy between different forms of D&D.

I mean, rhe difference is the widespread adoption of the Internet. I'm sure rhere was plenty of hostility around 2E, but it was localized and not networked. For 3E, it was all over the web, all the time.

 

[Reynard]

Actually, I HAVE heard of this. I haven't met many who state this in person though. In what I saw at the time period, I didn't hear much complaining about it either, and the sales for 2e weren't terribly horrendous where it showed what you state.

We know that at best 2E sold about 1/3 of what 1E sold.