1st ed again.
- Thread starter zamoran
- Start date
Desdichado
Hero
Y'know, Zamoran, the reason nobody can take you seriously on this thread is that you make this claim without having seen 3e. You only one one system, and you love it. Great! But don't compare it to a system you don't know. Some of us have played OD&D, D&D1e, D$D2e (not a typo!
) and D&D3e. 3e is by far the best system in that line-up. 3e makes 1e look like a cheap, garage-quality production. 3e makes 1e look unplaytested, illogical and silly.
Last edited:
ColonelHardisson
What? Me Worry?
Look, I played 1e (and a little original D&D) back in the 70s and on into the 80s. I still have my 1e books. I guarantee that you can have as much fun with 3e as 1e, and 3e corrects all the mistakes and imbalances from earlier editions. That isn't a knock on 1e; 3e simply had more than 2 decades of playtesting with 1e and 2e. 3e is much more easy to customize to one's taste than previous editions.
But, if you still like 1e after checking out 3e, then HackMaster may be the game for you. Kenzer got the rights to 1e and 2e, and the game is essentially the older editions of AD&D. I have the HackMaster books, and I love them.
But, if you still like 1e after checking out 3e, then HackMaster may be the game for you. Kenzer got the rights to 1e and 2e, and the game is essentially the older editions of AD&D. I have the HackMaster books, and I love them.
ColonelHardisson
What? Me Worry?
Another thing I'd like to point out is that Al-Qadim is a very good book, easily the equal to Oriental Adventures 1e, if not better than that book. No, it doesn't exactly have new classes, but the source material is great, and the artwork is superb. The kits in the book are either more along the lines of character background, with little game mechanics involved (a good thing), or are radically different versions of the core classes - in the case of the sha'ir, a magic-using class, it's really a new class altogether. I've been trying to adapt and balance the various kits for 3e use, something I don't usually do, since kits were often very unbalanced, because Al-Qadim's concepts are fascinating and worthy of inclusion in 3e.
*** Yeah! And whats all this with this new car thing. Horses can do everything a car can anyday. And they have style. ***
cool.
I'll tell you what.
I live in one of the oldest town in America
and in the old section of town, the streets
are almost too narrow for the big traffic
of rush hours
cause, originally, these roads were made
for walkers & riders !
Not a joke.
*** Y'know, Zamoran, the reason nobody can take you seriously on this thread is that you make this claim without having seen 3e. You only one one system, and you love it. Great! But don't compare it to a system you don't know. Some of us have played OD&D, D&D1e, D$D2e (not a typo! ) and D&D3e. 3e is by far the best system in that line-up. 3e makes 1e look like a cheap, garage-quality production. 3e makes 1e look unplaytested, illogical and silly. ***
Your opinion taken into account and
I guess you're partly right.
But I like garage quality
(I also listen to hardcore
(I mean punk/metal not techno)
music).
Also, I like it when I read 1st ed
and it seems (only sometimes)
that the author is trying to explain
rules to me in particular
or seems to get lost (a little bit!)
in his writings (Legends & Lore's introductory part).
This makes it all seem so much more alive.
Less synthetic and aesthetic and sterilized.
And dark ages and medieval times
were not synthetic/aesthetic/sterilized !
*** Look, I played 1e (and a little original D&D) back in the 70s and on into the 80s. I still have my 1e books. I guarantee that you can have as much fun with 3e as 1e, and 3e corrects all the mistakes and imbalances from earlier editions. That isn't a knock on 1e; 3e simply had more than 2 decades of playtesting with 1e and 2e. 3e is much more easy to customize to one's taste than previous editions. ***
I take your word for it.
*** But, if you still like 1e after checking out 3e, then HackMaster may be the game for you. Kenzer got the rights to 1e and 2e, and the game is essentially the older editions of AD&D. I have the HackMaster books, and I love them. ***
Is it possible to take a look at samples from the actual books
on the net ? If so, please point me there ?
*** Another thing I'd like to point out is that Al-Qadim is a very good book, easily the equal to Oriental Adventures 1e, if not better than that book. No, it doesn't exactly have new classes, but the source material is great, and the artwork is superb. The kits in the book are either more along the lines of character background, with little game mechanics involved (a good thing), or are radically different versions of the core classes - in the case of the sha'ir, a magic-using class, it's really a new class altogether. I've been trying to adapt and balance the various kits for 3e use, something I don't usually do, since kits were often very unbalanced, because Al-Qadim's concepts are fascinating and worthy of inclusion in 3e. ***
I get you very well.
My heart has spoken.
Now I don't have anymore to say
except if I get to know 3e.
Then I might respond with my head
instead of my heart.
Just maybe
cool.I'll tell you what.
I live in one of the oldest town in America
and in the old section of town, the streets
are almost too narrow for the big traffic
of rush hours
cause, originally, these roads were made
for walkers & riders !
Not a joke.
*** Y'know, Zamoran, the reason nobody can take you seriously on this thread is that you make this claim without having seen 3e. You only one one system, and you love it. Great! But don't compare it to a system you don't know. Some of us have played OD&D, D&D1e, D$D2e (not a typo! ) and D&D3e. 3e is by far the best system in that line-up. 3e makes 1e look like a cheap, garage-quality production. 3e makes 1e look unplaytested, illogical and silly. ***
Your opinion taken into account and
I guess you're partly right.
But I like garage quality
(I also listen to hardcore
(I mean punk/metal not techno)
music).
Also, I like it when I read 1st ed
and it seems (only sometimes)
that the author is trying to explain
rules to me in particular
or seems to get lost (a little bit!)
in his writings (Legends & Lore's introductory part).
This makes it all seem so much more alive.
Less synthetic and aesthetic and sterilized.
And dark ages and medieval times
were not synthetic/aesthetic/sterilized !
*** Look, I played 1e (and a little original D&D) back in the 70s and on into the 80s. I still have my 1e books. I guarantee that you can have as much fun with 3e as 1e, and 3e corrects all the mistakes and imbalances from earlier editions. That isn't a knock on 1e; 3e simply had more than 2 decades of playtesting with 1e and 2e. 3e is much more easy to customize to one's taste than previous editions. ***
I take your word for it.
*** But, if you still like 1e after checking out 3e, then HackMaster may be the game for you. Kenzer got the rights to 1e and 2e, and the game is essentially the older editions of AD&D. I have the HackMaster books, and I love them. ***
Is it possible to take a look at samples from the actual books
on the net ? If so, please point me there ?
*** Another thing I'd like to point out is that Al-Qadim is a very good book, easily the equal to Oriental Adventures 1e, if not better than that book. No, it doesn't exactly have new classes, but the source material is great, and the artwork is superb. The kits in the book are either more along the lines of character background, with little game mechanics involved (a good thing), or are radically different versions of the core classes - in the case of the sha'ir, a magic-using class, it's really a new class altogether. I've been trying to adapt and balance the various kits for 3e use, something I don't usually do, since kits were often very unbalanced, because Al-Qadim's concepts are fascinating and worthy of inclusion in 3e. ***
I get you very well.
My heart has spoken.
Now I don't have anymore to say
except if I get to know 3e.
Then I might respond with my head
instead of my heart.
Just maybe
ColonelHardisson
What? Me Worry?
Go to
http://www.kenzerco.com
and look for the links to HackMaster. They have a few excerpts, and have some monsters in pdf form to download.
HackMaster's art also harkens back to 1e AD&D's art, and is mostly very good.
http://www.kenzerco.com
and look for the links to HackMaster. They have a few excerpts, and have some monsters in pdf form to download.
HackMaster's art also harkens back to 1e AD&D's art, and is mostly very good.
I've gotta disagree with you on a few points, zamoran. I can't comment on 2e (never played it, and truly have no desire to), but I cut my roleplaying teeth on 1e, and currently play 3e.
While I agree that 1e has a very cool darker, grittier feel to it than 3e. I think part of this is just the times though. 1e was printed back in the 70s, when roleplaying games were still very much an underground hobby, and as such not subject to as much public scrutiny as they are today. 3e was published in the late 90s, and thus is a bit more family-friendly, though that doesn't necessarily make it more watered-down or less fun/interesting.
Rules-wise, I personally think 3e is lightyears beyond what 1e was, and for a good reason: the 3e system was built on decades of experience with gaming, from developers who saw systems come and go, not to mention the rise and fall of two previous editions of D&D. This provided them with some perspective on what worked, what didn't, what needed some tweaking, and what should be scrapped altogether.
As for the number of saving throws, I've gotta agree with Carnifex: how is more necessarily better?
Overall, 3e represents a great streamlining of the rules system, which should attract a great number of new players who were previously intimidated by the books full of tiny type and tables that sometimes covered several pages.
Just my 2 coppers.
Edit: Sorry, I misunderstood your first post, and took it as 3e bashing. I hadn't read the rest of the thread when I posted this. However, I'd like to leave it up just the same because I think I made some good points.
While I agree that 1e has a very cool darker, grittier feel to it than 3e. I think part of this is just the times though. 1e was printed back in the 70s, when roleplaying games were still very much an underground hobby, and as such not subject to as much public scrutiny as they are today. 3e was published in the late 90s, and thus is a bit more family-friendly, though that doesn't necessarily make it more watered-down or less fun/interesting.
Rules-wise, I personally think 3e is lightyears beyond what 1e was, and for a good reason: the 3e system was built on decades of experience with gaming, from developers who saw systems come and go, not to mention the rise and fall of two previous editions of D&D. This provided them with some perspective on what worked, what didn't, what needed some tweaking, and what should be scrapped altogether.
As for the number of saving throws, I've gotta agree with Carnifex: how is more necessarily better?
Overall, 3e represents a great streamlining of the rules system, which should attract a great number of new players who were previously intimidated by the books full of tiny type and tables that sometimes covered several pages.
Just my 2 coppers.
Edit: Sorry, I misunderstood your first post, and took it as 3e bashing. I hadn't read the rest of the thread when I posted this. However, I'd like to leave it up just the same because I think I made some good points.
Last edited:
What you say makes sense.
Here are a few pointers.
*** Rules-wise, I personally think 3e is lightyears beyond what 1e was, and for a good reason: the 3e system was built on decades of experience with gaming, ***
It can't be "lightyears beyond",
it's still AD&D and they didn't invent anything.
*** from developers who saw systems come and go, not to mention the rise and fall of two previous editions of D&D. ***
1st ed never fell !!!
They just made that impression on you
on purpose.
The company just felt it was too old for the public
or something
and came up with a new look
more than a new game.
If 1st ed ever fell, it's not in the way of the game system,
it's in the way of money,
take a look at how it really happened :
http://www.gygax.com/gygaxfaq.html
(click on "AD&D and My Leaving TSR")
*** This provided them with some perspective on what worked, what didn't, what needed some tweaking, and what should be scrapped altogether. ***
Maybe the 3e is an improvement on technicalities for many.
Fine, have fun. I just say the ones missing on something
might not be me not rushing to buy the new edition
but might be some people who never did and never will
know the 1st.
That's just my way of saying, hey, the 1st ed's so cool !
That's the original, the real one, and still my favorite !
*** As for the number of saving throws, I've gotta agree with Carnifex: how is more necessarily better? ***
I have not said that.
I have talked about style and armor class.
*** Overall, 3e represents a great streamlining of the rules system, which should attract a great number of new players who were previously intimidated by the books full of tiny type and tables that sometimes covered several pages. ***
On that, I agree, that's good for these reasons.
Here are a few pointers.
*** Rules-wise, I personally think 3e is lightyears beyond what 1e was, and for a good reason: the 3e system was built on decades of experience with gaming, ***
It can't be "lightyears beyond",
it's still AD&D and they didn't invent anything.
*** from developers who saw systems come and go, not to mention the rise and fall of two previous editions of D&D. ***
1st ed never fell !!!
They just made that impression on you
on purpose.
The company just felt it was too old for the public
or something
and came up with a new look
more than a new game.
If 1st ed ever fell, it's not in the way of the game system,
it's in the way of money,
take a look at how it really happened :
http://www.gygax.com/gygaxfaq.html
(click on "AD&D and My Leaving TSR")
*** This provided them with some perspective on what worked, what didn't, what needed some tweaking, and what should be scrapped altogether. ***
Maybe the 3e is an improvement on technicalities for many.
Fine, have fun. I just say the ones missing on something
might not be me not rushing to buy the new edition
but might be some people who never did and never will
know the 1st.
That's just my way of saying, hey, the 1st ed's so cool !
That's the original, the real one, and still my favorite !
*** As for the number of saving throws, I've gotta agree with Carnifex: how is more necessarily better? ***
I have not said that.
I have talked about style and armor class.
*** Overall, 3e represents a great streamlining of the rules system, which should attract a great number of new players who were previously intimidated by the books full of tiny type and tables that sometimes covered several pages. ***
On that, I agree, that's good for these reasons.
Similar Threads
