Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
AD&D First Edition inferior?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 393513" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>No more serious repercusions than dropping 'to hit vs. AC tables' did in 1st edition. Combat will still work with D20 'lite', but you lose a certain degree of 'realism', 'balance', and cinematic quality.</p><p></p><p>Without the 'to hit vs. AC tables' and some rules (usually house rules) taking into account reach, there was essentially no reason to use anything but a sword - specifically long swords and two-handed swords - because swords were, without the 'to hit vs. AC tables', vastly superior to any other weapon in every situation. Not only that, but some weapons which should not be that effective, say darts or shurikens, were positively broken, and people could go around using blow guns vs. dragons and men in full plate. </p><p></p><p>But of all the things that ulimately drove me from AD&D to GURPS, it was the lack of cinimatic quality to AD&D combats. The AD&D combat system was so abstract that it often disolved down to (especially in the players minds) a dice rolling session. I sometimes felt I should automate combat it had such a mechanical feel. What would happen if someone chose to dodge rather than fight? The parry mechanics in UA helped, but they were clunky and not well balanced. There were so many situations that I would like to have 'happen' in combat, that didn't because the players were just rolling dice and reporting numbers instead. GURPS let a fight play out in a highly visual manner that had become lost in AD&D.</p><p></p><p>"3e is much more of a tactical miniature based system at heart."</p><p></p><p>If I have any complaint at all against D20, it is its reliance on minatures. On this one issue alone do I have a major complaint against Monte. Monte loves minatures, and he designed a system that defaults to thier use. I detest minatures. I loath them. Not because I mind buying or painting them, but because when you use minatures people stop using thier imagination in the same way - exactly the problem I had with D&D in its first incarnation. When you use minatures, the tendancy is to imagine your character in the third person instead of the first. The tendancy is to remove yourself from the virtual environment and look down, godlike, on the game and think about your character being that little metal figure 5 squares from that little door.</p><p></p><p>I hate that. I hate having to move around minatures every time I describe something. I hate people describing thier actions in game terms, 'I take a move equivalent action and step 6 squares west, then attack', rather than in something cinematic and I hate how if you are not careful in describing something cinimatically that you are more ambigious in D20 than in AD&D. If I say 'I run up to the fell beast, and hew it with my sword hoping to distract it from Bro. Jozon. "Pick on someone your own size, swine."', did I take a run action, a charge, or a normal move and attack? </p><p></p><p>Experienced D20 groups probably overcome these problems, but they still bug me.</p><p></p><p>"It would make a good man to man tactical fighting system, kind of like GUPRS advanced combat."</p><p></p><p>It's not nearly that good, but the nice part of it is that it isn't nearly that good. It lies in some sort of happy medium between high realism and quick resolution.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 393513, member: 4937"] No more serious repercusions than dropping 'to hit vs. AC tables' did in 1st edition. Combat will still work with D20 'lite', but you lose a certain degree of 'realism', 'balance', and cinematic quality. Without the 'to hit vs. AC tables' and some rules (usually house rules) taking into account reach, there was essentially no reason to use anything but a sword - specifically long swords and two-handed swords - because swords were, without the 'to hit vs. AC tables', vastly superior to any other weapon in every situation. Not only that, but some weapons which should not be that effective, say darts or shurikens, were positively broken, and people could go around using blow guns vs. dragons and men in full plate. But of all the things that ulimately drove me from AD&D to GURPS, it was the lack of cinimatic quality to AD&D combats. The AD&D combat system was so abstract that it often disolved down to (especially in the players minds) a dice rolling session. I sometimes felt I should automate combat it had such a mechanical feel. What would happen if someone chose to dodge rather than fight? The parry mechanics in UA helped, but they were clunky and not well balanced. There were so many situations that I would like to have 'happen' in combat, that didn't because the players were just rolling dice and reporting numbers instead. GURPS let a fight play out in a highly visual manner that had become lost in AD&D. "3e is much more of a tactical miniature based system at heart." If I have any complaint at all against D20, it is its reliance on minatures. On this one issue alone do I have a major complaint against Monte. Monte loves minatures, and he designed a system that defaults to thier use. I detest minatures. I loath them. Not because I mind buying or painting them, but because when you use minatures people stop using thier imagination in the same way - exactly the problem I had with D&D in its first incarnation. When you use minatures, the tendancy is to imagine your character in the third person instead of the first. The tendancy is to remove yourself from the virtual environment and look down, godlike, on the game and think about your character being that little metal figure 5 squares from that little door. I hate that. I hate having to move around minatures every time I describe something. I hate people describing thier actions in game terms, 'I take a move equivalent action and step 6 squares west, then attack', rather than in something cinematic and I hate how if you are not careful in describing something cinimatically that you are more ambigious in D20 than in AD&D. If I say 'I run up to the fell beast, and hew it with my sword hoping to distract it from Bro. Jozon. "Pick on someone your own size, swine."', did I take a run action, a charge, or a normal move and attack? Experienced D20 groups probably overcome these problems, but they still bug me. "It would make a good man to man tactical fighting system, kind of like GUPRS advanced combat." It's not nearly that good, but the nice part of it is that it isn't nearly that good. It lies in some sort of happy medium between high realism and quick resolution. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
AD&D First Edition inferior?
Top