AD&D First Edition inferior?

[barsoomcore]

It is simply identifying mongrels as what they are

Okay, that was the funniest thing anyone's said all day.

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Hey, I never took offense at demihuman level limits; I just ignored 'em.

You show your traitorous nature thus, and I am offended.

May you be hounded by a band of bearded female dwarf groupies!

Sinverely,
Gary

 

[ColonelHardisson]

You show your traitorous nature thus, and I am offended.

May you be hounded by a band of bearded female dwarf groupies!

Sinverely,
Gary

That doesn't sound bad at all...

 

[Col_Pladoh]

That doesn't sound bad at all...

Aaawk!

The depravity!

I am sooooo offended!

Heh,
Gary

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

3e combat is a chore compared to the simplicity of the AD&Dsystem. We didn't use weapon speed and to hit vs AC tables. It was simplicity to drop those and reduce thecombat to roll a 20, check to hit chart, roll damage. No power attacks, flanks, expertises, defensive fights, etc. Dropping those from d20 has serious reprecussions however. 3e is much more of a tactical miniature based system at heart. It would make a good man to man tactical fighting system, kind of like GUPRS advanced combat. Not bad but not to my liking.

[and later...]

That him and his players were Munchkins? That is so far from my experience with multiple groups of players that it's not even funny. For every elf fighter/mu there nine human PC's of various classes. Maybe we were just superior players? I mean we could all subtract without much problem as well. Hmmmm...

You are impressing no one by trying to play the "Youse a Munchkin!" card. And if Power Attack and flanking is causing you such trouble, there is no way I put any stock in your or your friends' ability to subtract.

The point stands that 1e failed to provide a "reasonable" amount of game balance for a certain type of player.

Now maybe game balance is not important to you -- a valid POV. To me, it is high on my short list of reasons to help pay a game designer's salary. The key thing to keep in mind is ignoring or removing game balance is a trivial thing to do. Creating game balance take enormous work -- that's why I prefer to leave that in the hands of a pro. An rpg designed with game balance preinstalled pleases both those who want it and those who don't care. That is a clear point of superiority for 3e -- it is enjoyable by more types of players.

While I agree the miniatures-based nature of 3e has made it a bit rules heavy, the bottom line is "So What?". Complicated movement rules and the like are actually quite easy to yank out, and then you end up no worse off than you were with 1e.

The only serious repurcussion of yanking annoying rules out of 3e is you will strain game balance. If you like 1e so much, that is clearly not on the list of things you care about. And surely "superior players" would never be intimidated by a little issue like that.

What I love about 3e is it is much more customizable than previous editions. Trimming or adding skills and feats goes a long way, without having to get my hands dirty and invent completely new mechanics.

 

[Col_Pladoh]

The point stands that 1e failed to provide a "reasonable" amount of game balance for a certain type of player.

Not to quibble, but that statement applies to every RPG ever invented. It is the proberbial two-edged sword, and it can make any number of attacks

As a point of possible interest, I believe the current audience for 3E is nearly as large as that OAD&D had back around 1985. Ain't progress grand!

Gary

 

[Melan]

I don't think the audience is as large as AD&D's in the mid 80s. We would need some good, old fashioned controversy like:
-"attachment to satanic cults" (this is so... passé)
-"desensitising the youth to violence" (better, but still lacks the umph)
-"GYGAX is leading the future generation into a hellhole of debauchered depravity, indulgence, sex and indecency! Surely, the fate of the ENTIRE nation is at stake! We must ban RPGs immediately!"

See, the last is much better, and would enlarge the audience considerably. So... Gary, do you feel you are up to the task?

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

I don't think the audience is as large as AD&D's in the mid 80s. We would need some good, old fashioned controversy like:
-"attachment to satanic cults" (this is so... passé)
-"desensitising the youth to violence" (better, but still lacks the umph)
-"GYGAX is leading the future generation into a hellhole of debauchered depravity, indulgence, sex and indecency! Surely, the fate of the ENTIRE nation is at stake! We must ban RPGs immediately!"

See, the last is much better, and would enlarge the audience considerably. So... Gary, do you feel you are up to the task?

Ewwwww....sorry, but I can think of much better people to lead me into depravity, sex, and indecency. No offense, Gary, but the beard doesn't do anything for me.

 

[Col_Pladoh]

I don't think the audience is as large as AD&D's in the mid 80s. We would need some good, old fashioned controversy like:
-"attachment to satanic cults" (this is so... passé)
-"desensitising the youth to violence" (better, but still lacks the umph)
-"GYGAX is leading the future generation into a hellhole of debauchered depravity, indulgence, sex and indecency! Surely, the fate of the ENTIRE nation is at stake! We must ban RPGs immediately!"

See, the last is much better, and would enlarge the audience considerably. So... Gary, do you feel you are up to the task?

Dude!

I'm there!

Heh,
Gary

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

As a point of possible interest, I believe the current audience for 3E is nearly as large as that OAD&D had back around 1985. Ain't progress grand!

Okay, that does pique my interest. So what was the audience of OAD&D circa 1985? What year did it peak?

I think it would also be interesting to compare to sales number of the rpg market as a whole, year to year.

I suspect computer games have eaten into the rpg market to a large extent. Computer gaming is a multibillion dollar a year sector, dwarfing both the rpg industry and board game industry at this point in time. It was just getting out of diapers in '85.