OD&D 4e World with OD&D Feywild?

[Agglomérante]

Anybody tried swapping systems as a way to represent a weird shift in locale/vibe?

I can't shake this idea:

While the party's in the Feywild, the game's run with OD&D rules.

The character conversion's hopelessly inaccurate but so what? It works fine as part of the wyrd.

Thumbs up? Down? Advice?

Thanks for keeping the edition wars out of it.

* * *

The Feywild chapter in the Manual of the Planes is brilliant. I read it the same week as this trip down memory lane: A Quick Primer for Old School Gaming.

Seemed like chocolate in my peanut butter.

 

[the Jester]

I did something like this with a time travel arc in the 2e part of my campaign. While the pcs were back in time, they played under 1e rules. Even going from 2e to 1e the conversions were hopelessly inaccurate, but it was a fun change for a few sessions.

 

[Agglomérante]

I did something like this with a time travel arc in the 2e part of my campaign. While the pcs were back in time, they played under 1e rules. Even going from 2e to 1e the conversions were hopelessly inaccurate, but it was a fun change for a few sessions.

That's an elegant idea. How'd you hit the players with it?

Glad to hear it worked.

 

[the Jester]

That's an elegant idea. How'd you hit the players with it?

Rather by surprise.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Seems to me 2e -> 1e would be fairly trivial. Heck I think half my campaign never even got converted to 2e back in the day. The combat systems are practically the same, spellcasting barely different. If you just use stats as they are and don't try to convert armor or whatnot (just use whatever AC you get, its not far off) then no big deal.

Going from 4e to 1e/2e though, yeah, pretty drastic. Its not TOO hard to convert most 1e/2e characters INTO 4e since classing was pretty limited. There will be some minor things the converted PC can't do or suddenly can do, but MCing can pretty much let you get past the humps. Going backwards? Ouch. Its going to be rough. Fighters and even clerics maybe aren't TOO bad, even paladins. Wizard is going to be a bit of a mess. Warlock I couldn't even think of a way to do except maybe just make it an M.U. with a bit different spell selection. Primal classes like shaman and warden just have no real equivalents. I guess you could do something with kits.

 

[the Jester]

Seems to me 2e -> 1e would be fairly trivial. Heck I think half my campaign never even got converted to 2e back in the day. The combat systems are practically the same, spellcasting barely different. If you just use stats as they are and don't try to convert armor or whatnot (just use whatever AC you get, its not far off) then no big deal.

Look at clerics, though.

Plus, at the time, we were using the "2.8" books- Skills & Powers, Spells & Magic, Combat & Tactics & High-Level Campaigns. During the 2e years, I STRONGLY disliked generic clerics and didn't really allow them. So we went from a "channeling" specialty priest who used longswords to a 1e cleric. Also, we had a psionicist that converted all weird, I think maybe a shaman (from S&M), etc... so it wasn't as trivial to convert as it maybe sounded!

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Look at clerics, though.

Plus, at the time, we were using the "2.8" books- Skills & Powers, Spells & Magic, Combat & Tactics & High-Level Campaigns. During the 2e years, I STRONGLY disliked generic clerics and didn't really allow them. So we went from a "channeling" specialty priest who used longswords to a 1e cleric. Also, we had a psionicist that converted all weird, I think maybe a shaman (from S&M), etc... so it wasn't as trivial to convert as it maybe sounded!

Well, 2e -> 1e psionics would be kind of ugly. I guess my real question would be why even convert most things? 2e vs 1e is really not much difference at all. Spell lists change a tiny bit here and there, you have some different spell using classes like priests and specialists, but the 2e spells themselves work OK in 1e so no real need to force those characters into the 1e mold at all. Like I say, we ran 2e characters in my campaign for several years and pretty much the whole setting and various encounters etc were still all the old 1e stuff. Higher level monsters did get a bunch tougher, but they didn't really use rules that were incompatible.

Even thieves aren't really incompatible between the editions, a 2e thief just has different chances of doing this or that. Fighters get a bigger hit die and the ability to specialize in weapons, so they get a bit more powerful but you can run a 2e fighter in a 1e game fine, there's nothing he can do that the 1e rules won't cover.

Honestly, in all the time we played 2e I never did find anything it really did that was much different from 1e. It just beefed up some classes a bit, added a bunch of options to spell caster builds and then kits added in a bunch of slightly wierd stuff which could all have been added to 1e just as easily.

Anyway, sorry for getting so OT. I think its interesting to use different rules for something like the feywild. It would be a lot of work to go back to the old style rules for it, but in theory it sounds like fun.

 

[Roger]

"By the way, Galstaff, you only have 2 hitpoints now."



Cheers,
Roger

 

[Agglomérante]

I guess my real question would be why even convert most things?

I'd just want to make sure no player needed to pull out a 2e rule book when the party's in the past.

I've got enough supplies to pull it off in 1e, but AD&D's got too much structure. I figure just the old school style of play is enough to make the Feywild sessions feel wild, "unfair," capricious, dangerous, etc. The simpler the system, the faster the swap.

I don't even own a copy of Basic D&D. I'm checking out Swords & Wizardry (loving it so far).

 

[Agglomérante]

"By the way, Galstaff, you only have 2 hitpoints now."

"And the very pebbles beneath your feet are quivering."