Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
1e Play Report
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5848374" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>In my experience, most 1e DM's - then and now - have an enormous body of house rules that they keep in their head under the lose heading of 'the way I do things'. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Then you don't have 3 pages of house rules. You have 3 pages of things you've considered important enough to write down because you've felt the need to communicate them, and who knows how many pages of stuff you've not considered important enough to write down. But make no mistake, these consitute a huge rule book of things you've memorized and relied on in play. </p><p></p><p>.</p><p></p><p>I will only say that what you've described is a far more complicated system than you think it is.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure, but that's not a valid measurement. You've fallen into a logical fallacy, and are starting to make me feel as if I'm the Conneticutt Yankee in King Author's Court. </p><p></p><p>You're arguing that 3e PC's can be compared with 1e PC's to determine their power. That's like arguing that if a person gets a $200 dollar a week salary in 2012, that he's objectively wealthier than a person who gets a $100 dollar a week salary in 1912. What you have to do is not compare the $200 in 2012 to the $100 in 1912, but compare how much you can buy in 1912 with $100 to how much you can buy with $200 in 2012. You'll find that money in 2012 and 1912 aren't perfectly comparable, but if you compare comparable things from one era to the other that $100 made one wealthy in 1912 but a pauper in 2012. The 10th level 3e PC can probably beat a 10th 1e PC head to head (all things being equal), but that's a ridiculous measurement. A 10th 3e PC is a fragile easily killed thing that has no chance of facing an iconic dragon. A 10th 1e PC is an epic figure capable of squaring off versus anything in the game and who is nearing the point where he will need to be retired because very little in the game is left to threaten him. If you really want to compare how things have changed, compare something like a 1e Balrog to a 3e Balrog and the expectations about when a PC would be able to face down such a threat.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'll grant that to a certain extent. Except that grabbing feats is one of least time consuming jobs in creating an NPC. In both 1e and 3e you'll still need to note equipment, and assign spells. The extra burden of assigning feats is a small extra burden. By far the most time consuming thing in 3e is assigning skill points, but there you can often simply leave the task undone until you need it - much as you would in 1e.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Thanks for the example. It will be very useful for making my point. </p><p></p><p>First of all, you didn't compare like to like. You'd need to compare ogres to ogres to make a good comparison. The ogre picks up an extra line by virtue of needing possessions. </p><p></p><p>Secondly, I agree that in general the 3e stat block is 1-2 lines longer than the equivalent 1e stat block, but there is a kicker. The 3e stat block is complete. The 1e stat block is not. The first edition stat block simply tells you what tables to reference, and includes only the most commonly used information about the monster.</p><p></p><p>It doesn't for example address the question: Do worker ants have infravision? You'd have to look that up. Also, the typical 1e stat block doesn't note that 1e stirges have a bonus to initiative; you'd need to remember that or flip open a book while running the combat. You'd also need to look up its saves, THAC0, and so forth on a table. This isn't so bad in the case of the worker ant, but consider the case of the 1e ogre stat block. Quick, what is the to hit modifer of a club to hit a AC 4? What is its weapon speed factor? What is its bend bars check? (Ogres do have a strength score, it's just not listed in the stat block.) According to the DMG rules for grappling, what damage does an ogre do in a grapple and what is the chance that it will succesfully grapple a player? </p><p></p><p>Now, you might be saying, "That's not a fair comparison. I don't use to hit modifiers for weapons vs. AC. And I never have used the DMG rules for grappling in a game (and besides, they look broken anyway, we have our own house rules)." And all that may be true, but it doesn't mean my comparison is less fair. Rather I will say that the reason that you don't use 'to hit modifiers for weapons vs. AC' and that you don't use the grappling rules is that they <em>aren't included in the stat block, so you never considered that they were important and by the time you figured out what they were you'd become acustomed to playing in one manner and ignoring them.</em></p><p></p><p>In other words, the lightness of the stat block helped create for you a 'rules light' version of 1e that is what you mean by when you say you play 1e AD&D.</p><p></p><p>Meanwhile, for me, the 'heavier' looking 3e stat block is actually means less work and overhead for me than the 1e one because it means that - having the stat block - I don't really need to look at anything else. And, if I wanted a stripped down stat block that didn't list skills, base attack bonus, flat-footed AC, special qualities, etc. that din't necessarily come up in every fight or weren't relevant to the encounter, I could.</p><p> </p><p>Most important, in 1e I would have had to hand write this down in my prep (in practice I probably didn't write stat blocks, just '8 orcs'). In 3e, I can cut and paste a stat block from a file that lists all the monsters stat blocks. The extra length doesn't burden me in preperation at all, and in play it actually makes things go faster.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I suppose I don't either, but as an ancedote, everyone in this thread who is upset with my characterization of 1e appears to be playing a minimized cut down version of the game and trumpeting this minimalist quality as the reason that they prefer the system.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I mean that you've played a lot of D&D but it seems to have been a pretty uniform experience. That is, you asserted that '1e is grittier than 3e' and all you can really assert is, "The 1e games I played in were grittier than the 3e ones I played in", and I'm not at all convinced you've seen a broad range of 1e or 3e games depite your years of experience.</p><p></p><p>I've seen ~12th level 1e characters that could generate upwards of 100 pts of damage on average per round. By comparison the 3e Ranger you are citing is a total tosser.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>1) Did you play with the Unearthed Arcana?</p><p>2) How many issues of Dragon did you own?</p><p></p><p>As just an obvious example, an 11th level ranger in 1e is going to have starting out a +10 bonus to hit relative to a 0th level fighter that is hidden within his better THAC0. Sure, it's not described as a bonus to hit, but that's what it is. So that 11th level ranger could have an 18 DEX, be specialized in the longbow, own a +5 longbow, and fire +5 arrows. That would be right there without even stretching be a +26 to hit. I wouldn't be surprised if he could kill every monster in the 1e DMG - including the unique ones - just by winning surprise, and could otherwise dispatch ancient dragons by himself in a single round. Granted, a good DM would probably not have granted the best possible weapons by 11th level, but I'm just trying to show that even without getting deep in to Dragon and other optional rules how easy it is to get 3e like numbers. </p><p></p><p>In point of fact, 3e didn't add anything. That 3e ranger being able to add his strength to his longbow damage if he's using a master work weapon, got that concept from a popular extension of the 1e rules. Likewise 3e critical hits also came from a popular 1e extension of the rules. I've seen 1e Rangers generate more than 100 hit points worth of damage in a single round. (In point of fact, I've seen more than 200 hit points worth of damage in a single round in 1e, but that's on the extreme 'non-gritty' superhero end of the scale.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is the point at which if we were face to face I'd ask you to bet me a dollar (or a lunch) on that assertion just to give you some pause to your certainty. You're experience is your own and its real, but it's not the limit of what is out there by any stretch of the imagination. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure. Your math is all good. The problem is that the 1e fighter with 18 Con and ~100 hit points now has more hit points than all but a handful of monsters in the game. A huge ancient red dragon has but 88 hit points (nasty breath, but a glass cannon). A pit fiend has but 60 or so. The 3e fighter ONLY has 110-120 hit points because there are plenty of ordinary monsters out there with 300-400 hit points, more than Zeus in 1e. The numbers are meaningless without a point of comparison.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Or less potent stuff plus a dexterity bonus, or some other AC enhancing item that stacks with magic armor (boots of speed, for example).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5848374, member: 4937"] In my experience, most 1e DM's - then and now - have an enormous body of house rules that they keep in their head under the lose heading of 'the way I do things'. Then you don't have 3 pages of house rules. You have 3 pages of things you've considered important enough to write down because you've felt the need to communicate them, and who knows how many pages of stuff you've not considered important enough to write down. But make no mistake, these consitute a huge rule book of things you've memorized and relied on in play. . I will only say that what you've described is a far more complicated system than you think it is. Sure, but that's not a valid measurement. You've fallen into a logical fallacy, and are starting to make me feel as if I'm the Conneticutt Yankee in King Author's Court. You're arguing that 3e PC's can be compared with 1e PC's to determine their power. That's like arguing that if a person gets a $200 dollar a week salary in 2012, that he's objectively wealthier than a person who gets a $100 dollar a week salary in 1912. What you have to do is not compare the $200 in 2012 to the $100 in 1912, but compare how much you can buy in 1912 with $100 to how much you can buy with $200 in 2012. You'll find that money in 2012 and 1912 aren't perfectly comparable, but if you compare comparable things from one era to the other that $100 made one wealthy in 1912 but a pauper in 2012. The 10th level 3e PC can probably beat a 10th 1e PC head to head (all things being equal), but that's a ridiculous measurement. A 10th 3e PC is a fragile easily killed thing that has no chance of facing an iconic dragon. A 10th 1e PC is an epic figure capable of squaring off versus anything in the game and who is nearing the point where he will need to be retired because very little in the game is left to threaten him. If you really want to compare how things have changed, compare something like a 1e Balrog to a 3e Balrog and the expectations about when a PC would be able to face down such a threat. I'll grant that to a certain extent. Except that grabbing feats is one of least time consuming jobs in creating an NPC. In both 1e and 3e you'll still need to note equipment, and assign spells. The extra burden of assigning feats is a small extra burden. By far the most time consuming thing in 3e is assigning skill points, but there you can often simply leave the task undone until you need it - much as you would in 1e. Thanks for the example. It will be very useful for making my point. First of all, you didn't compare like to like. You'd need to compare ogres to ogres to make a good comparison. The ogre picks up an extra line by virtue of needing possessions. Secondly, I agree that in general the 3e stat block is 1-2 lines longer than the equivalent 1e stat block, but there is a kicker. The 3e stat block is complete. The 1e stat block is not. The first edition stat block simply tells you what tables to reference, and includes only the most commonly used information about the monster. It doesn't for example address the question: Do worker ants have infravision? You'd have to look that up. Also, the typical 1e stat block doesn't note that 1e stirges have a bonus to initiative; you'd need to remember that or flip open a book while running the combat. You'd also need to look up its saves, THAC0, and so forth on a table. This isn't so bad in the case of the worker ant, but consider the case of the 1e ogre stat block. Quick, what is the to hit modifer of a club to hit a AC 4? What is its weapon speed factor? What is its bend bars check? (Ogres do have a strength score, it's just not listed in the stat block.) According to the DMG rules for grappling, what damage does an ogre do in a grapple and what is the chance that it will succesfully grapple a player? Now, you might be saying, "That's not a fair comparison. I don't use to hit modifiers for weapons vs. AC. And I never have used the DMG rules for grappling in a game (and besides, they look broken anyway, we have our own house rules)." And all that may be true, but it doesn't mean my comparison is less fair. Rather I will say that the reason that you don't use 'to hit modifiers for weapons vs. AC' and that you don't use the grappling rules is that they [I]aren't included in the stat block, so you never considered that they were important and by the time you figured out what they were you'd become acustomed to playing in one manner and ignoring them.[/I] In other words, the lightness of the stat block helped create for you a 'rules light' version of 1e that is what you mean by when you say you play 1e AD&D. Meanwhile, for me, the 'heavier' looking 3e stat block is actually means less work and overhead for me than the 1e one because it means that - having the stat block - I don't really need to look at anything else. And, if I wanted a stripped down stat block that didn't list skills, base attack bonus, flat-footed AC, special qualities, etc. that din't necessarily come up in every fight or weren't relevant to the encounter, I could. Most important, in 1e I would have had to hand write this down in my prep (in practice I probably didn't write stat blocks, just '8 orcs'). In 3e, I can cut and paste a stat block from a file that lists all the monsters stat blocks. The extra length doesn't burden me in preperation at all, and in play it actually makes things go faster. I suppose I don't either, but as an ancedote, everyone in this thread who is upset with my characterization of 1e appears to be playing a minimized cut down version of the game and trumpeting this minimalist quality as the reason that they prefer the system. I mean that you've played a lot of D&D but it seems to have been a pretty uniform experience. That is, you asserted that '1e is grittier than 3e' and all you can really assert is, "The 1e games I played in were grittier than the 3e ones I played in", and I'm not at all convinced you've seen a broad range of 1e or 3e games depite your years of experience. I've seen ~12th level 1e characters that could generate upwards of 100 pts of damage on average per round. By comparison the 3e Ranger you are citing is a total tosser. 1) Did you play with the Unearthed Arcana? 2) How many issues of Dragon did you own? As just an obvious example, an 11th level ranger in 1e is going to have starting out a +10 bonus to hit relative to a 0th level fighter that is hidden within his better THAC0. Sure, it's not described as a bonus to hit, but that's what it is. So that 11th level ranger could have an 18 DEX, be specialized in the longbow, own a +5 longbow, and fire +5 arrows. That would be right there without even stretching be a +26 to hit. I wouldn't be surprised if he could kill every monster in the 1e DMG - including the unique ones - just by winning surprise, and could otherwise dispatch ancient dragons by himself in a single round. Granted, a good DM would probably not have granted the best possible weapons by 11th level, but I'm just trying to show that even without getting deep in to Dragon and other optional rules how easy it is to get 3e like numbers. In point of fact, 3e didn't add anything. That 3e ranger being able to add his strength to his longbow damage if he's using a master work weapon, got that concept from a popular extension of the 1e rules. Likewise 3e critical hits also came from a popular 1e extension of the rules. I've seen 1e Rangers generate more than 100 hit points worth of damage in a single round. (In point of fact, I've seen more than 200 hit points worth of damage in a single round in 1e, but that's on the extreme 'non-gritty' superhero end of the scale.) This is the point at which if we were face to face I'd ask you to bet me a dollar (or a lunch) on that assertion just to give you some pause to your certainty. You're experience is your own and its real, but it's not the limit of what is out there by any stretch of the imagination. Sure. Your math is all good. The problem is that the 1e fighter with 18 Con and ~100 hit points now has more hit points than all but a handful of monsters in the game. A huge ancient red dragon has but 88 hit points (nasty breath, but a glass cannon). A pit fiend has but 60 or so. The 3e fighter ONLY has 110-120 hit points because there are plenty of ordinary monsters out there with 300-400 hit points, more than Zeus in 1e. The numbers are meaningless without a point of comparison. Or less potent stuff plus a dexterity bonus, or some other AC enhancing item that stacks with magic armor (boots of speed, for example). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
1e Play Report
Top