D&D 1E 1e Play Report

[Celebrim]

No disrespect, but I really don't understand why Cerebrim would even bother with his original post. I mean, why put all that time and effort into writing in great detail about how you *don't* like something?

You don't like AD&D 1e. Cool. Move on.

You mean, as opposed to putting little time and effort in to writing about how you don't like something?

You don't like my post. Cool.

Incidently, any time you preface what you say with 'Meaning no disrespect', it makes what you are going to say sound less respectful than it would otherwise. (Certainly to me foremost, and to a lot of people I've talked to as well.) It's a verbal tic that people would be better off without in my opinion. Say what you have to say and be honest about it; don't go pretending to anyone, least of all yourself that you are saying something you aren't in the name of false politeness.

As for my reasoning, I was just interested (and somewhat surprised) by how 1e came off to me when I returned to it. In 99% of the threads in about 1e I've participated in, I was the one defending it against what I thought was unfair attacks.

 

[Water Bob]

I don't agree with a lot of the OP's points, but I also think WotC has the capability of supporting both of our playstyles, and should endeavor to do so.

Just a note: The goal of 2E AD&D was to take the game off the kitchen table with players focussed on graph paper and put it in the living room with players comfortably seated listening to the DM's description of what's going on--no hard measurement at all. If you needed range, then you simply asked the DM. This was told to me by one of that edition's designers, Steve Winter. If people wanted to still play the "old way", he said, then they could, but that wasn't the aim of the second edition.

Did TSR achieve this goal?

Your answer varires depending on who you talk to.

Incidently, any time you preface what you say with 'Meaning no disrespect', it makes what you are going to say sound less respectful than it would otherwise.

I completely disagree. I think my first post in this thread had something to that effect with my words, and I meant it.

Honestly, I never used miniatures in my whole career as a 1e DM.

I've never used a single real miniature in any RP game I've run, ever. I use the tacks, as I describe above. And, before that, I'd draw little circles with the characters' initial on it when scribbling on graph paper with a No. 2 pencil. But, I've never purchased or painted or even used a mini before.

I never though the mini's were worth the cost, time, and effort. Plus, they're too big--I usually like one large sheet of graph paper to cover an entire level of a dungeon, not just a room or two.

 

[That Darn DM]

I've never used a single real miniature in any RP game I've run, ever. I use the tacks, as I describe above. And, before that, I'd draw little circles with the characters' initial on it when scribbling on graph paper with a No. 2 pencil. But, I've never purchased or painted or even used a mini before.

I never though the mini's were worth the cost, time, and effort. Plus, they're too big--I usually like one large sheet of graph paper to cover an entire level of a dungeon, not just a room or two.

I use miniatures all the time, but I never go out of my way to buy those "booster packs" WOTC had brought out. I paint miniatures as a hobby, so I have plenty of the little buggers around my house. I got into Warhammer when I was taking a D&D break because I didn't want to try 3e and when I finally did come back to D&D I had a lot of Orcs and miniatures. Now and again, I'll buy miniatures when I like what I see, but not specifically for a D&D game. Merely just because I like painting them.

But, my point is you're absolutely right. Miniatures merely for D&D do not hold up to the cost. Graph paper works better, in all reality.