AD&D First Edition inferior?
- Thread starter Theuderic
- Start date
Three different styles in the one module, depending on need.
I'll illustrate with a few made-up examples:
Style the First
10 Goblins (hp 3 x4, 5 x2, 6 x4, see MM)
Style the Second
Bruno the Magnificent (human Ftr4, see DMG except also has Swim +4, and additional feat Combat Reflexes).
Style the Third
full stat block style which we're all familiar with.
Most stat-blocks are given in the appendix, with the reference in the text being "1 War Weasel (hp 329, see Appendix 1)"
Cheers!
I'll illustrate with a few made-up examples:
Style the First
10 Goblins (hp 3 x4, 5 x2, 6 x4, see MM)
Style the Second
Bruno the Magnificent (human Ftr4, see DMG except also has Swim +4, and additional feat Combat Reflexes).
Style the Third
full stat block style which we're all familiar with.
Most stat-blocks are given in the appendix, with the reference in the text being "1 War Weasel (hp 329, see Appendix 1)"
Cheers!
Vaxalon
First Post
Geoffrey said:Merric, I don't understand. Does this module contain full stat-blocks or not? From your post it seems like it doesn't, until the last four words of your post: "and full stat blocks".
It has page number and hit points in the text (so that it's not interrupted) with stat blocks in fine print in an appendix.
Generally speaking, stat blocks aren't necessary, but they speed things up a LOT. Warhammer FRP does it, too, by the way.
MerricB said:
I understand now, Merric!
But these big stat blocks in the appendix is still something you never saw in TSR's OAD&D modules. The OAD&D modules didn't merely relegate big stat blocks to the back of modules for the simple reason that big stat blocks were utterly nonexistent.
Why, then, does 3E/d20 have lots of stats and OAD&D has few? I think the biggest culprits are skills and feats. IMO, the essential genius of D&D is the fact it is based on classes. This was watered down in several versions:
post-Gygax 1st edition: Nonweapon proficiencies were added in the DSG and the WSG.
2nd edition: Nonweapon proficiencies were added to the core rules (though were labeled as optional).
HackMaster: Skills are in the core rules and are not labeled optional, though they can easily be ignored.
3rd edition: Skills and feats are so integral to this game that I think the game couldn't be played without them (especially skills).
Skills/proficiencies/feats/whatever necessitate more stats. More stats means more factors to consider when running combat. It's all too complicated for my taste. I prefer straight character classes with no skills and such muddying the waters.
"But what if the character tries to do something not addressed in the rules?" That's what good DMing is for. D&D was played for over a decade before skills started creeping in. We had a great time. Those who wanted skills played GURPS. (To me, skills in D&D make as much sense as character classes in Call of Cthulhu.)
If WotC ever publishes a 3E Lite (no feats and skills, just a handful of classes with pre-selected abilities), then I'll carefully consider it. There are several things about 3E that I find attractive (the more rapid level-gain being one of the foremost), but the complexities of 3E as it stands turn me off.
Last edited:
Yes, OD&D had shorter stat-blocks. It also left so many holes, for so many situations that virtually every game was an off-the-cuff value call by the DM.
Yes, I know you OD&D fans extol the virtue of "making it up as we went along", and claim that all these new rules are just crutches. And some old-timers still claim that the Model-T was the greatest car ever built, though their numbers grow mercifully smaller with each passing year. Doesn't mean I find either opinion particularly convincing. When dealing with reasonably simple actions, I like to be standing on solid ground, not relying on a DM's whim...
Yes, I know you OD&D fans extol the virtue of "making it up as we went along", and claim that all these new rules are just crutches. And some old-timers still claim that the Model-T was the greatest car ever built, though their numbers grow mercifully smaller with each passing year. Doesn't mean I find either opinion particularly convincing. When dealing with reasonably simple actions, I like to be standing on solid ground, not relying on a DM's whim...
Geoffrey said:
Seems like 3e added three things:
* Streamlined character attributes (ie. the modifiers)
* Complex combat (not that complex is bad)
* Skills and Feats
I **think** the three can be taken apart. Don't like the miniatures-based combat? Return everything back to +4 +2 -2 -4 combat modifiers. Skills and feats making character generation take too long? Don't use 'em (well, except for thieves!) -- you didn't back in AD&D.
I think the modifiers, where a stat of 14 actually means something, was a great idea.
Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^
Similar Threads
- Poll
