AD&D Publication Timeline -- weird

[Beginning of the End]

But Gygax and others often made sure to explain that AD&D was a completely different game than OD&D and BD&D.

AD&D was originally intended to be an expansion of OD&D. Notably the AD&D Monster Manual was published first, with the intention that people would start using these monsters and rules in their OD&D campaigns.

Then it became a way to not pay Arneson royalties and it was suddenly a "completely different game".

In addition, my understanding is that the DMG was delayed because it took much longer to finish than Gygax originally intended. Or possibly because of a problem with scheduling the printers. Or possibly both.

And then there were six AD&D modules published in 1978, before the game system publication was complete. (These were all billed as “ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS” modules.) Those first modules published for AD&D were for high levels – 8-14.

This was, again, because these modules were being marketed to the existing OD&D market. Or possibly because the campaigns of the people designing them had been around long enough that their PCs were at mid-to-high level and, therefore, that's the material they were developing.

In '79 when AD&D is a completed ruleset, you get an introductory product. In '80 you see publication of the modules that were developed for mid-level convention play. Then in '81, as the D&D fad is beginning to boom, TSR rolls out even more low-level support.

It's not the result of a comprehensive marketing plan. But it makes a good deal of sense when you look at who TSR was actually selling to at any given time.

The other thing to understand about this is that TSR was actually late in coming to the module market: Judges Guild had already published a ton of material (and it was the success of that material that convinced TSR to start publishing modules). So TSR's product line is not the totality of D&D/AD&D product at the time.

 

[olshanski]

I was a kid at the time, only 11, and my friends and I often didn't understand the difference between the rule sets. We usually played with a mix of OD&D, BD&D and AD&D and didn't really notice or care about the differences. It worked fine for us.

So when AD&D PHB came out, but before AD&D DMG came out, we were playing just fine with a mix of OD&D and Holmes BD&D. We didn't think anything was missing, and when the DMG came out it was just more interesting stuff to throw in our mix.

 

[Plane Sailing]

No one was at all concerned about AD&D and BD&D being different games -- we all used whichever modules or supplements we wished, mixing and matching.

Exactly right!

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

Dang [MENTION=40735]darkseraphim[/MENTION] did you know all that off the top of your head? Impressive history lesson indeed. Found it interesting actually, I was born in 78, so lets just say I never played the OD&D stuff, I was actually a late comer to D&D and got into the gaming scene in my early 20's at the tail end of AD&D 2E. I always find the perspectives of the original gamers to be interesting and hearing about their experiences with the beginning editions.

 

[JamesM]

Keep in mind that these were the days before the interwebs, too. Most people didn't even know that there was supposed to be any kind of division between the two unless they were an avid gaming magazine reader.

Absolutely and, even then, knowing TSR's official line on the matter and accepting it were two different things. I knew people who did take it at face value and insisted that D&D, whether of the LBB, Holmes, or Red Box variety, wasn't the same as AD&D and thus beneath their notice, but I knew far more for whom such esoteric divisions didn't matter in the slightest.

 

[steeldragons]

Through the snow! Up hill! Both ways!

n' don't forget... NO SHOES! Just wrapped our feet in pages of D&D ad comics...ragga fragga ruffa two bit whippersnappers n' their new fangled rolly-skates grumble grumble

--Steel Dragons

PS: I've given out too much XP in the last 24 hours. So if someone would care to add to Bullgrit's most amusing post for me, I'll gladly XP you Thursday for an XP today.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

n' don't forget... NO SHOES! Just wrapped our feet in pages of D&D ad comics...ragga fragga ruffa two bit whippersnappers n' their new fangled rolly-skates grumble grumble

--Steel Dragons

PS: I've given out too much XP in the last 24 hours. So if someone would care to add to Bullgrit's most amusing post for me, I'll gladly XP you Thursday for an XP today.

+1 XP per your request SD!

 

[steeldragons]

+1 XP per your request SD!

Gracias.

 

[Mercurius]

It is all part of the charm of that strange beast called Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. In fact, the lack of sense that AD&D made is what has made many of its advocates dislike 3.x and 4e - both contemporary editions make too much sense.

What? A "core mechanic," you say? Phaw!!

 

[El Mahdi]

Well the difference between 78 and 79 could have been a few days if you think about it. Perhaps the PHB was published at the end of December 78 (Dec 31st) and the DMG was published at the beginning of 79 (Jan 1st) it could in theory have been only 1 day apart right?

The PHB was published June '78. I can't find the month published for the DMG. So that's at least 7 months.

According to the Acaeum, August '79 for the DMG. So, 1 year and 2 months.