AD&D: There and Back Again - a Role-Player's Tale

[IronWolf]

Again, those are SOFT, suggestion tables for DC. They are in no way HARD DC numbers as the ones in 1E.

Please read the skill descriptions and apply the verbatimness you do to the 1st edition rule books:

Check: The DC for opening a lock varies from 20 to 40, depending on the quality of the lock, as given on the table below.

Then the table below:

DC20 Very Simple Lock
DC25 Average Lock
DC30 Good Lock
DC40 Amazing Lock

It seems you read the 1st edition rules with one filter and then apply a different one when reading the 3rd edition rules.

 

[lumin]

Earlier, you claimed that AD&D has a table to cover every imaginable situation. Have you backed away from that position? You've listed only a small number of possible PC actions that have hard numbers attached to them. Is that all you have?

No, I have not backed away from it because every situation that could arise NOT within a table would be disallowed by the DM. So, yes, AD&D covers EVERY situation imaginable even if that means that many were a "no" from the Game Master.

And, again, I stated in my post that that was a very small sampling. So no, that is not "all I have".

 

[lumin]

Please read the skill descriptions and apply the verbatimness you do to the 1st edition rule books:

Check: The DC for opening a lock varies from 20 to 40, depending on the quality of the lock, as given on the table below.

Then the table below:

DC20 Very Simple Lock
DC25 Average Lock
DC30 Good Lock
DC40 Amazing Lock

It seems you read the 1st edition rules with one filter and then apply a different one when reading the 3rd edition rules.

So the rules state that the DC for opening a lock "varies". In AD&D, the DC for opening a lock does NOT vary.

Which edition is more free-wheeled and which is more strict?

 

[IronWolf]

No, I have not backed away from it because every situation that could arise NOT within a table would be disallowed by the DM. So, yes, AD&D covers EVERY situation imaginable even if that means that many were a "no" from the Game Master.

Why would it be disallowed by the DM? The DMG says to do this:

"There will be times in which the rules do not cover a specific action that a
player will attempt. In such situations, instead of being forced to make a
decision, take the option to allow the dice to control the situation."

 

[Fifth Element]

I am looking at this from a completely fresh perspective because I have only played 3rd Edition D&D prior to this. I am seeing it without the cloud of years of nostalgia or years of "ingrained" bias about what the rules were. I am making an objective assessment about the rules stated on the pages in the book.

You're arguing with people that still play AD&D, and assuming that their impressions of the game are based solely on nostalgia. You'll find discussions go better here when you don't assume that you know things about other people better than they know themselves.

Claiming that your assessment is "objective" and that others' (with much more experience with the game, I might point out) is "nostalgic" is misguided.

And what I see is a game that is much more strict in its encounter resolution than 3rd Edition.

I find this claim more than a bit nutty. 3E encounter resolution relies, by the book, on a grid with specific action types and movement rules. I've played more than 10 years each of 3E and AD&D, and calling AD&D more strict in its encounter resolution is just...something I've never heard before.

 

[lumin]

You're arguing with people that still play AD&D, and assuming that their impressions of the game are based solely on nostalgia. You'll find discussions go better here when you don't assume that you know things about other people better than they know themselves.

Claiming that your assessment is "objective" and that others' (with much more experience with the game, I might point out) is "nostalgic" is misguided.


I find this claim more than a bit nutty. 3E encounter resolution relies, by the book, on a grid with specific action types and movement rules. I've played more than 10 years each of 3E and AD&D, and calling AD&D more strict in its encounter resolution is just...something I've never heard before.

Okay fine, so maybe it's time to look at the rules objectively instead of just relying on what "you've heard before".

 

[Fifth Element]

No, I have not backed away from it because every situation that could arise NOT within a table would be disallowed by the DM. So, yes, AD&D covers EVERY situation imaginable even if that means that many were a "no" from the Game Master.

How does this mesh with the quote Pawsplay provided? Here it is again:

There will be times in which the rules do not cover a specific action that a player will attempt. In such situations, instead of being forced to make a decision, take the option to allow the dice to control the situation. This can the player dice to see if he or she can make that percentage. You can weigh the dice in any way so as to give the advantage to either the player or the non-player character, whichever seems more correct and logical to you while being fair to both sides.

Seriously, explain how this passage says "they can't do it if it's not on a table" instead of the plain meaning of "if it's not on a table, figure something out, but try to be fair."

 

[lumin]

Why would it be disallowed by the DM? The DMG says to do this:

"There will be times in which the rules do not cover a specific action that a
player will attempt. In such situations, instead of being forced to make a
decision, take the option to allow the dice to control the situation."

That's fine, but the same disclaimer can be found in 3rd Edition. That still doesn't change the fact that the DC tables written in the 1E book are much more strict than what is written in 3E.

 

[Fifth Element]

That's fine, but the same disclaimer can be found in 3rd Edition. That still doesn't change the fact that the DC tables written in the 1E book are much more strict than what is written in 3E.

Still can't see it. There might be the same disclaimer, but since the 3E rules cover so much more territory than the AD&D rules, it comes up far less often.

 

[lumin]

How does this mesh with the quote Pawsplay provided? Here it is again:


Seriously, explain how this passage says "they can't do it if it's not on a table" instead of the plain meaning of "if it's not on a table, figure something out, but try to be fair."

You're debating a non-sequitur. I think every edition of D&D has a passage like this. What we're debating is which encounter resolution system written in the book is more free-form.

1E is much, much stricter, as I have shown above.