D&D General D&D Editions: Anybody Else Feel Like They Don't Fit In?

[Thomas Shey]

Well, RuneQuest also has Strike Ranks, doesn't it? Which means longer weapons getting to hit first is baked into the core of the combat system? Whereas that's the rule in D&D only in 1E, and only in the single round when combatants close to melee.

That, and honestly, OD&D spears were inferior weapons which RQ ones (especially longspears) really weren't. Combine that with the fact a larger number of characters could use one effectively (pretty much all tribal types got trained in them) you just could easily end up being a simultaneously more practical and effective choice.

I mean, let's say you were wandering around with a six character party and a couple of henchmen. The latter were going to primarily be human mules, because among OD&D groups it wasn't even often assumed they'd level, nor be treated as FM for traits, so putting them on the line wasn't attractive if you wanted to keep them around for their hauling duties. By a bit in, that'd probably be two Fighters, two MU, a Cleric and a Thief. With either 2 or 3 abreast lines, who was going to be doing that second row of spears?

 

[Thomas Shey]

Three-abreast in a 10'-wide passage plus reach weapons poking through from the second rank was and still is SOP round here if-when a party happens to have enough warriors to make it work. Far more often it's seen as an opposition tactic when the foes are halfway organized and don't have many (if any) backliners.

It was 3e that forced everyone into 5' squares. Before that, 3 feet would do and even less if the character was small e.g. a Gnome or Hobbit (or Goblin or Kobold, as many a party has found!) of which you could get 4 across a 10' passage.

Its been so many years I can't remember, but I suspect we used 3' spaces back in the day too; I don't recall RQ 1-meter-hexes seeming unusually small.

That said, I'm not sure we automatically assumed most passages were 10' wide, either. That's a pretty wide corridor (yes, I realize most things were done in 10' space increments inside in OD&D, but we'd probably have just assumed that was a range-and-movement thing, not a definition of minimum or expected spaces.)

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'll just direct you to the post I was responding to. If someone is going to go "Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it was uncommon" then I think pointing out experience with a large number of people in the period who didn't do that is perfectly legitimate. After all, that seems to be what they were doing in reverse.

I responded to you, but my message was for everyone, myself included.

 

[Voadam]

That, and honestly, OD&D spears were inferior weapons which RQ ones (especially longspears) really weren't. Combine that with the fact a larger number of characters could use one effectively (pretty much all tribal types got trained in them) you just could easily end up being a simultaneously more practical and effective choice.

I mean, let's say you were wandering around with a six character party and a couple of henchmen. The latter were going to primarily be human mules, because among OD&D groups it wasn't even often assumed they'd level, nor be treated as FM for traits, so putting them on the line wasn't attractive if you wanted to keep them around for their hauling duties. By a bit in, that'd probably be two Fighters, two MU, a Cleric and a Thief. With either 2 or 3 abreast lines, who was going to be doing that second row of spears?

Two abreast, one fighter in the front along with the thief in the front row with the cleric in row two along with an MU, so the thief can check for traps or scout ahead but the tank cleric is ready to put his heavy armor on the front line when the scout comes running back chased by a monster. The second fighter is rear guard but has a pole weapon to swap with the not maximum-packed middle PCs if there is a frontal melee to increase melee attacks going out. The MUs back up to safety if there is an engagement and let others move around in that middle or if ambushed from behind the new front space.

 

[Lanefan]

That, and honestly, OD&D spears were inferior weapons which RQ ones (especially longspears) really weren't. Combine that with the fact a larger number of characters could use one effectively (pretty much all tribal types got trained in them) you just could easily end up being a simultaneously more practical and effective choice.

I mean, let's say you were wandering around with a six character party and a couple of henchmen. The latter were going to primarily be human mules, because among OD&D groups it wasn't even often assumed they'd level, nor be treated as FM for traits, so putting them on the line wasn't attractive if you wanted to keep them around for their hauling duties. By a bit in, that'd probably be two Fighters, two MU, a Cleric and a Thief. With either 2 or 3 abreast lines, who was going to be doing that second row of spears?

The two henches could be given spears and become that second line. The front-line would in theory protect them (and if that protection fails the party's probably hosed anyway) and any damage the henches managed to inflict would be a bonus.

That, and IME a typical 6-character party looks more like 3 Fighters*, a Cleric, a Thief, and a Mage. (says he, currently running a 6-character party that has nary a Thief nor Mage to be seen; given the mission they're on they can probably get by without a Thief but lack of a Mage could really hurt 'em at some point)

* - one of these might be a heavy Ranger instead, or multi-classed with Cleric to provide a bit more healing.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Two abreast, one fighter in the front along with the thief in the front row

I never, ever saw a group put a thief in the front row. D4 hit points were not going to encourage that, even if their Dex pushed them up to a decent AC He and the cleric were almost always in the back row to guard the mages (who, after all, had as bad a hit points as the thief and worse AC, and to intelligent opponents were a more attractive targets.

I'm not sure I'd have ever seen a thief make it to second level if people did that. One hit by almost anything and he'd be dead.

 

[Thomas Shey]

The two henches could be given spears and become that second line.

The last thing most people wanted was to have them be actively attracting fire. Remember, in the groups I saw, their primary job was carrying treasure out. Can't do that well if they're dead.

The front-line would in theory protect them (and if that protection fails the party's probably hosed anyway) and any damage the henches managed to inflict would be a bonus.

Archery from low level opponents was a thing, and it was very hit or miss how GMs would treat the front line in protecting from that (as was whether it was perceived you could even use spears from second rank--again, these were often not people with a wargaming background, and nothing under the entry for spears in OD&D would suggest it was practical).

That, and IME a typical 6-character party looks more like 3 Fighters*, a Cleric, a Thief, and a Mage. (says he, currently running a 6-character party that has nary a Thief nor Mage to be seen; given the mission they're on they can probably get by without a Thief but lack of a Mage could really hurt 'em at some point)

Don't think I ever saw the 6th character in a six character party be a third fighter. Might occasionally be a second cleric.

(This is, of course, ignoring the 12 character parties which could vary considerably)

* - one of these might be a heavy Ranger instead, or multi-classed with Cleric to provide a bit more healing.

In the OD&D days, as I recall, there wasn't a provision for multiclassing with cleric for much of anybody. You'd see the elven fighter/mage business on occasion, or some thief combos, but dual classing didn't come along until AD&D as I recall (I can't speak for the B/X and other offshoots at all) and even people who allowed dwarven or elven clerics didn't usually allow them to multiclass, so there was a very low chance of ever seeing a cleric multiclassed with anything.

 

[Azzy]

In the OD&D days, as I recall, there wasn't a provision for multiclassing with cleric for much of anybody. You'd see the elven fighter/mage business on occasion, or some thief combos, but dual classing didn't come along until AD&D as I recall (I can't speak for the B/X and other offshoots at all) and even people who allowed dwarven or elven clerics didn't usually allow them to multiclass, so there was a very low chance of ever seeing a cleric multiclassed with anything.

There were no multiclassing or dual-classing in the BECMI (and I assume B/X as well, but I'm much less knowledgeable of that edition). Unless it was in some supplement that I'm unaware of.

 

[Remathilis]

In the OD&D days, as I recall, there wasn't a provision for multiclassing with cleric for much of anybody. You'd see the elven fighter/mage business on occasion, or some thief combos, but dual classing didn't come along until AD&D as I recall (I can't speak for the B/X and other offshoots at all) and even people who allowed dwarven or elven clerics didn't usually allow them to multiclass, so there was a very low chance of ever seeing a cleric multiclassed with anything.

This is one of those "everyone did it differently and nobody did it by RAW" areas of old D&D.

OD&D didn't have true multiclassing. Elves could pick being a fighter or a mage day to day, but everyone else was a single class. Multiclassing was partly the benefit of those new classes like paladin, ranger and bard.

Basic every a single class, and races were a unique class. Elves were all gish, and everyone else was effectively fighters. Eventually new classes came that mimicked other mixes. (IE dwarf cleric).

1e AD&D introduced multiclassing, but they were fairly limited. Dwarves could be F/T, as could halflings. Elves could be any combination of fighter, magic user and thief. Gnomes could do the same, but with illusionist instead of magic user. Only half-elves could be multi class clerics and had all manner of options. Half-orcs could be fighter/assassins. Unearthed Arcana and 2e added more options by adding cleric to the gnome and dwarf options.

All this to say that part of the problem with these anecdotes is that not everyone was using the same rules and even when they were, the amount of house rules guaranteed no two games every played the same. Thus, two people discussing what it was like "back in the day" will often have very different memories of what it was like. Even referencing the rulebook and assumptions in them is faulty since few people played AD&D pure, Gary being among them. So it's very possible to say something that was true for AD&D and then have people respond with memories of OD&D, Basic, or Frankensteined mixes of all three.

 

[Zardnaar]

I have been playingbokd D&D.

I've been letting Thieves backstab held and stunned NPCs or asleep ones.

Letting a MC one specialize in 2E. Might buff tge skill points 50%. I liked the C&C one vs TSR thief.

Might rewrite the class as well or let the replace backstab with sneak attack.

New group has 3 priests so healing won't be an issue.