3e & 1e Ad&d/od&d

[Morrow]

I would be thrilled to play oD&D again.

 

[evil_rmf]

I DM a 3E game and play in a 1E game. Both are fun. Both have problems.

For the 3E game, we kicked around what rules to play. We almost played the Rules Cyclopedia/basic/expert/etc.. version of D&D instead , but thought we'd give 3E a shot. We've been pretty happy with it. The mechanics are certainly different, but you know what, in the end, all the flavors of D&D boil down to swords and sorcery, and a lot of fun.

When the current 3E game winds down, it's either going to be a classic 1E greyhawk campaign complete with the GDQ series (we've all forgotten the details) or hackmaster that we pickup next.

Or gamma world.

Or GURPS.

Hell, I dunno know.

 

[ced1106]

If not would you consider particapating in a campaign using a different edition/version/form of D&D in the hands of a consumate DM?

Considering how few there are? Sure!


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^

 

[La Bete]

If the campaign idea was good enough, maybe - though I think I would prefer the D&D cyclopedia to 1e/2e.

Why?

A few years ago, I was playing in 2 games, a 1e (with allthe books) and a 2.8 (Players Opt.) game.

The 2.8 game was interesting, but was, as someone said earlier, a power-gamers wet dream. Also, the house-rules began to get out of control. Only the fact it was a Birthright game kept it under control.

The 1e game was kinda fun - it was classic module-style 1e. The problem was, is that wasnt really the style of game I was interested in playing - and the game didnt really seem to cater for other ways of playing (strictly my opinion - YMM - and probably does - V).

The main problem was that in choosing to play a Human Thief, in a game that had a female LG Dark-Elf Cavalier-Cleric, I was choosing to try and suck a golf ball through a soda straw. Kinda interesting, but mostly painful.

The I ran a 2e game which transitioned to 3e. Man what a difference. I had some players that were new to d&d - and they were finding some of the 'idiosyncracies' a bit tricky. No such probs with 3e - rolling high is good, always use a d20 etc.

still, whatever works for you.

 

[Victim]

The only version of DnD that I'm not playing right now is Basic. I'll play pretty much anything.

 

[Mulkhoran]

After 18 years of nearly nothing but DnD, 3E is my holy grail.

I consider it nothing short of the natural evolution of a stumbling system into an actual rpg.

I would never go back. That way lies madness.

 

[Psion]

Just out of curiosity, do you play other versions of the D&D game besides the WOTC/d20 one?

No.

If not would you consider particapating in a campaign using a different edition/version/form of D&D in the hands of a consumate DM?

Maybe. I think I would offer to run first. If there were no other players to be had who would play 3e perhaps.

As the saying goes, you can never go home.

 

[Turlogh]

I would play any version of D&D except the Player's Option mess (had such great promise and lousy execution).
Never played OD&D but think it would be great to try (other than mess around a little with the Rules Encyclopedia).
1st AD&D only played a little of and other than never really understanding the surprise, initiative, segment thing it was very enjoyable.
2nd AD&D is the system I have played the most of and I still really like it.

But in the end 3E is where it is at and what I would like to be playing.

 

[Jay Berg]

Look it's obvious that BOTH games have shortcomings ( especially to a newbie who doesn't know enough of the rules & time to have tweeked them them ) but why attack the game? All I'm asking is if you would play it not a reason why it sucked or whatever have you.

Those different time zones always have me posting when it is dark night over in the holy land (insert USA here).

Anyway, I was in no way trying to attack a game. Subjectively speaking I really liked 1e better! That is because I like silly session like the whole G1-3 series!

But that is a purely subjective view, since I haven't been able to really play 3e. I have only read the books and really enjoy the new settings that come out.

I'll take back the stuff about 3e being more somber... it really boils down to the style of your DM. But I do believe that 3e has more transparancy because of the better balance. Still I loved those Unearthed Arcana rules though.

 

[David Argall]

3e rules, until 4e comes out

I played D&d, until Ad&D came out, which I found vastly improved by 2nd edition, which in turn was greatly improved by 3e. Given a choice between a 3e game and any of the older versions, there is just no contest.
The only reason I can see for sticking with the older models is mere habit. It can be a serious reason not to change, but it is no reason to go back. Put up with the flaws and irritants that have been corrected? Not a chance.
Make mine 3e, thank you