Any of you pine for AD&D 1/2?

[Psion]

Which has nothing to do with the "flexibility" you were touting in your post that I was responding to. You like guidelines. Fine. Those guidelines aren't in 1e to the extent that they are in 3e. Fine. What does that have to do with flexibility and the ability to create a complex villain?[/b]

See my earlier post about rangers. I can house rule things in, yes. But when I do, I am not talking about the system, and I do so at additional cost in time and additional risk of loss of consistency (and attendant risk of unexpected outcomes in the game) when I do so.

When the system is built from the ground up to be more flexible, I have less to worry about and less time to invest to get things the way I want them.

You seem confused that I would cite this as flexibility. I, on the other hand, am confused that I should have to explain the relationship. As far as I am concerned, the ability to house rule is not any sort of flexibility that is built into the system (and inasmuch as it is, I think the united base mechanics make 3e easier to house rule when it comes to that. BID.) Anybody can house rule the system; that's not a quality of the system and has attendant risks and costs in terms of time. Time I don't have now that I have three kids and work a 40 hour week.

Where you see ease with 3e, I see bloated and cumbersome rules. Where I see freedom in 1e, you see lack of consistency. That's all fine and dandy. I see no reason to run a 3e game, when I'm going to ignore or change better than half of the content of the rules. Which, I'd imagine, is the same reason you don't run 1e campaigns...

It seems we understand each other from this point.

 

[BryonD]

The point is, I don't want or need a "system" to customize my villains. Why can't I just write in my notes:

"These kobolds breath fire 3t./day, 2d4 dam., range 6'"
"The orc seargant is particularly strong and does +2 damage"
"The gnoll leader fights as a 6HD monster and has 35 hp"
"This wraith casts spells as MU5 - spells: Charm Person, Magic Missiles, etc."
"Harlech (Ill lvl3, hp8) hides in shadows as 5th level thief, and gets +2 save against all poisons - spells: Alter Self, etc."

Are you saying I can not do this with 3E? Go ahead, you will be wrong because I do it all the time.

I've got the best of both worlds.

The freedom to use my imagination to make up whatever I want and a stable rule structure to fall back on whenever I want to.

 

[rogueattorney]

Are you saying I can not do this with 3E?

Not at all. If I was DMing 3e, I'd do the same. I imagine you could do that with any system, and I don't see anything wrong with that. The point was that I don't need the system that Psion was touting to customize villains and monsters to my taste.

R.A.

 

[National Acrobat]

Neato

That's so cool. Most folks who prefer earlier editions have a lot of trouble finding a group who agrees; it's wonderful to hear that problem isn't universal.

Yeah, we all get along famously, have known each other since college, hang out regularly outside of gaming, kids go to school together, etc. We basically discussed what would make everyone enjoy gaming the most and our result was to play 1E. It was no sweat for us. Everyone pulled out their books, dusted them off, and away we went. For us, it's more about the story and fun-factor, and that's been way high since we switched back (or downgraded as some would say.)

 

[WSmith]

Played since 1979. When 3e arrived, I played it for 2 1/2 years. I grew tired of it for reasons I won't cite (see below) and went back to Basic / Expert D&D, and subsequently to first edition AD&D. I haven't looked back nor do I plan to, as I hate 3rd edition, but that is a matter of personal preference. We could debate for the next 7 pages about internal game rules consistancy, ad hoc rulings, DM fiat, mechanical balance, and many other subjective points of view, but it would do nothing but waste everyone's time. Edition Wars are over and nobody one.

The only thing that is a fact is that AD&D and d20 D&D present two different styles of play, each having a different feel when played. You may like one and not the other. You may like both for different reasons. You may not like either. To the original poster, the point is, if you have the yearning to pick up that old DMG off the shelf (BTW, that is an efreeti on the cover not a demon ) and give the old game a whirl go for it. You may decide it is not for you. You may like it more than 3rd ed. You might like it for a one shot but not a campaign. You have nothing to loose if you give it a try. The idea of RPGs are to have fun. If it makes you happy than play it.

 

[dead]

Played since 1979. When 3e arrived, I played it for 2 1/2 years. I grew tired of it for reasons I won't cite (see below) and went back to Basic / Expert D&D, and subsequently to first edition AD&D. I haven't looked back nor do I plan to, as I hate 3rd edition, but that is a matter of personal preference. We could debate for the next 7 pages about internal game rules consistancy, ad hoc rulings, DM fiat, mechanical balance, and many other subjective points of view, but it would do nothing but waste everyone's time. Edition Wars are over and nobody one.

The only thing that is a fact is that AD&D and d20 D&D present two different styles of play, each having a different feel when played. You may like one and not the other. You may like both for different reasons. You may not like either. To the original poster, the point is, if you have the yearning to pick up that old DMG off the shelf (BTW, that is an efreeti on the cover not a demon ) and give the old game a whirl go for it. You may decide it is not for you. You may like it more than 3rd ed. You might like it for a one shot but not a campaign. You have nothing to loose if you give it a try. The idea of RPGs are to have fun. If it makes you happy than play it.

I have utmost respect for you for playing 1st Edition.

I have to ask, though: Do you play in the Greyhawk campaign, Mystara/Known World campaign, or your own homebrew world?

Is it true to say that 1E AD&D = Greyhawk?

And, Basic D&D = Mystara/Known World?

Well, of course you can use the above systems with other worlds, but I guess I'm asking: Were those systems designed *for* those worlds? Or, was Basic D&D/1E AD&D designed first and then the worlds were incorporated later?

 

[Turanil]

Nope, i never played 1E so i have nothing to miss. I played 2E but i like the rules from 3e Better. Its more streamlined and easier to introduce people to. I kind of miss 2E's atmosphere though. It had that classical medieval europe feel to the places and art that 3E moved away from (somewhat).

The only thing that I miss from 1e and 2e is also that "classical medieval europe feel to the places and art that 3E moved away from". This is what I don't like about 3e: the art; not its quality, but the punkish or bland everything_and_its_brother_together type of heroic fantasy illustrations. Now, when back in 2e, there was an artist with a so poor imagination, that EVERY character he did draw had a helmet with horns on his head (how that can become boring over time... )

 

[Plane Sailing]

Not a chance. 1e ended up so boring that I moved over to other systems (esp. RuneQuest) and never really looked back. If it wasn't for 3e (and Eric Noah) I'd never have got back to D&D.

Cheers

 

[Greenstone]

This debate is one that will rage on forever. Why can't we all admit that we play the game that's best for ourselves and (hopefully) our players, whether its OD&D, 1st ed, 3rd ed or whatever?

I'm 36, have DMed OD&D, 1st and 2nd editions, but got sick of all the add-ons to 2nd editioin AD&D. I switched to the Palladium Role Playing Game, which BTW, is a d20 system - including AC(AR) equalling strike roll needed, BABs for character classes instead of THAC0s, etc. Has worked well for my group for the 10-year duration of our campaign... once we added a killer critical strike house rule. However, I'll admit that my players probably couldn't care what the system is - none of them even own a rule book or an adventure... hell, some don't even read fantasy fiction.

I've looked long and hard at 3e... I love the presentation of the books, and most of the art, and even most of the character classes. What I hate are the feats (seem to replace player creativity, and prevent PCs from saying 'I'll try to...') and the huge stat blacks that are needed to define monsters and villains. Hmmm, maybe C&C will suit me when it comes out.

Anyway, let's just play what we enjoy, and show everyone else the courtesy of letting them do the same.

 

[Greenstone]

Forgot my main point!

What I think many people miss is the WAY they played OD&D or AD&D, as opposed to the rules systems themselves.

I'm sure that, like me, many posters here used to have all-night sessions with student friends, sharing some good laughs along the way... I'll always remember playing Dragonlace 1-14 in '86 - '87... good times.

Nowadays, many of us are married, with kids, demanding jobs and the like. My role-playing is now limited to three hours a week on a Thursday night... (now you know why its been a 10-year long campaign) and my session preparation time is equally limited.

I believe, as somebody once said elsewhere on these forums, that much of our nostalgia is for the GAMES that we played back 'in the good old days', the friends that we played them with, and the simplicity of our lives back then, rather than any real devotion to whatever RULES set we were using... .

BTW, anyone else out there in Enworld reside in Cape Town, or elsewhere in South Africa?