AD&D, looking backwards, and personal experiences

These days, I'm not looking backward at AD&D. I'm staring it in the face. After years of running 3e and 4e, I find myself slightly over a year into an AD&D that was started, in all honestly, as a lark on a dare.

I've probably voiced most of the common criticisms of AD&D over the 27 years since I was introduced to RPGs through it. I've made house rules. I've moved on. I've mocked the various D&D-isms that place the game at odds with the fantasy fiction I enjoy.

And you know what? I'm kinda loving it. At it's core, it's a very simple system. I find I can run a session --while steadily drinking wine-- off of a handful of pages in the DMG and PHB (I lost my DMs screen ages ago). And the charts! So many wonderful charts from which unplanned situations can emerge. Why I've even made my peace with random monsters and crazy-quilt nonsense dungeons.

To be fair, the success I'm having with AD&D now is, in large part, due to all the wonderful/practical advice I've read over the years at places like ENWorld, from people with real insight into pre-3e D&D.

AD&D is not my end-all-be-all system. No system is. It's just the right tool for the job, for now. There are dimensions of play present in the later editions which are simply absent in AD&D --hey, I like char-op, too, and more robust mechanical modeling-- and when we miss that sufficiently I imagine we'll change systems.



I am in a a very similar place as you, I've run the gamut, from super loose 1st Ed, to consulting NASA for 3rd Ed builds; but after DMing 4th Ed for awhile, I suddenly got a hankering to really scour my pre 3rd-Ed goodies (love reading the Basic Moldvay Rulebook and the 1st Ed PHB) to see what I could come up, obviously with 3rd and 4th Ed awesomeness in mind, and along comes 5th Ed, so, I'm stoked (really digging 5th Ed so far), more to pillage from.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Maybe it's just a phase I'm going though... But a lot of gaming these days is starting to feel too... "Polished?" Not sure I can really explain it. It just feels too thought out? (I know I know that's a bad thing?)

Maybe it's just nostalgia for the games I grew up on? The ones with black and white art and soft covers... Grungy games. :P

Maybe I'm in a grunge rock game phase or something?

DCC RPG is really hitting the itch for me, I hope D&D Next does as well as more and more is revealed.
 

Maybe it's just a phase I'm going though... But a lot of gaming these days is starting to feel too... "Polished?" Not sure I can really explain it. It just feels too thought out? (I know I know that's a bad thing?)

Maybe it's just nostalgia for the games I grew up on? The ones with black and white art and soft covers... Grungy games. :P

Maybe I'm in a grunge rock game phase or something?

DCC RPG is really hitting the itch for me, I hope D&D Next does as well as more and more is revealed.

Total.

DCC?
 

Maybe it's just a phase I'm going though... But a lot of gaming these days is starting to feel too... "Polished?" Not sure I can really explain it. It just feels too thought out? (I know I know that's a bad thing?)

Maybe it's just nostalgia for the games I grew up on? The ones with black and white art and soft covers... Grungy games. :P
I know exactly what you mean. Early games were labors of love by amateur enthusiasts, not slick publications. Line art of variable quality, 'books' that were just 8 1/2 x11 mimeographs folded in half and stapled in the middle, typewriter-face fonts, rules with more enthusiasm than logic behind them, settings dotted with extra-genre references and goofy humor.

I got that feeling back in the 90s, actually. I guess I've gotten over it, or at least used to it, but on rare occasion, I do find a particularly amateurish game charming.
 


To be fair though, while the Illusionist kinda got dragged down (did anyone actually play a 1e illusionist? I never saw one)
Never played with me at the table, did ya? :)

Some of my best characters ever have been Illusionists - a couple in 1e, another in 3e - I love 'em!

Lan-"you only think you're reading this"-efan
 

I know exactly what you mean. Early games were labors of love by amateur enthusiasts, not slick publications. Line art of variable quality, 'books' that were just 8 1/2 x11 mimeographs folded in half and stapled in the middle, typewriter-face fonts, rules with more enthusiasm than logic behind them, settings dotted with extra-genre references and goofy humor.

I got that feeling back in the 90s, actually. I guess I've gotten over it, or at least used to it, but on rare occasion, I do find a particularly amateurish game charming.

Yeah- like I said it's probably just a phase, but who knows. There's also the feeling of "the unexplored" that a game like DCC is providing me. It's very reminiscent of when I first found D&D. It's not fair to D&D though- I think 2e had so much stuff that all editions forward have to play a lot of catch up before they start getting into the weird and unexplored areas.
 

To be fair though, while the Illusionist kinda got dragged down (did anyone actually play a 1e illusionist? I never saw one), the clerics with spheres was very, very cool.

My very first character was a gnome illusionist/assassin. Boy, he got screwed by 2E. :)

Interestingly, while looking at the AD&D PH to see if my memory was correct and it was a legal class combination, I discovered that while the combination is not listed on pp 32-33, it is legal by the wording of the gnome's description.

Cheers!
 

Never played with me at the table, did ya? :)

Some of my best characters ever have been Illusionists - a couple in 1e, another in 3e - I love 'em!

Lan-"you only think you're reading this"-efan

I recall some gnome Thief/illusionists in 2e, but, honestly, everyone I knew looked at the illusionist and saw the MU's red headed stepchild and never bothered.

To each his own.
 


Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top