At what point are you no longer playing AD&D?

[Valiant]

Do you think there are core rules that if not included (or drastically changed) in your AD&D game your no longer playing AD&D but rather something else?

In another thread I propose co-DMing is something that would go beyond the scope of being AD&D, as would those that never role dice, but story tell the entire time.

Or am I off base? Is there no amount of changing that can occure that would be too much.

 

[grodog]

I'm sure that you could modify the game such that most folks playing wouldn't readily recognize it as AD&D, with any of various sets of changes.

Having been a co-DM, I don't think that's one of them, myself, though.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I have to agree. I think co-DMs, or games with no dice rolling, can certainly be D&D.

Now, if you took gnomes and bards out, THEN it wouldn't be D&D.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Now, if you took gnomes and bards out, THEN it wouldn't be D&D.

They're not in my Basic set (gnomes as monsters are, gnomes as PCs aren't), so they're expendable.

 

[Scribble]

Do you think there are core rules that if not included (or drastically changed) in your AD&D game change that game into something else?

In another thread I propose co-DMing is something that would go beyond the scope of being AD&D, as would those that never role dice, but story tell the entire time.

Or am I off base? Is there no amount of changing that can occure that would be too much.

It's hard to answer that question because it sort of depends on the history of the game.

If the changes were made (somewhat) gradually over time, I think people would be able to accept any number of changes, and still be able to call it D&D. (They evolve right along with the system.)

 

[Crothian]

For me D&D is the feel of the game. I ran a WoD game that the players thought was more D&D then anything because of the way it was ran and played. If one takes a look at what we call D&D today and compares it to what it was 30 years ago one will see a mountain of difference, but as Billy Joel said "Its all D&D to me."

 

[rgard]

I have to agree. I think co-DMs, or games with no dice rolling, can certainly be D&D.

Now, if you took gnomes and bards out, THEN it wouldn't be D&D.

Maybe if you meant gnome illusionists...I'd agree!

 

[Gentlegamer]

Off the top of my head, and in my opinion:

If you added highly tactical combat, you wouldn't be playing AD&D anymore.

If you allowed players to purchase magical items with gp as a matter of course (using the magic item appendix as a shopping list), you wouldn't be playing AD&D anymore.

If you altered the character classes to be predicated on combat prowess for the source of their game-play worth/balance, you wouldn't be playing AD&D anymore.

If you disallowed all spontaneous player actions because the proposed actions are not covered explicitly by the written rules, you wouldn't be playing AD&D anymore.

If you change the magic system to something other than the "Vancian" system, you wouldn't be playing AD&D anymore (psionic system notwithstanding).

If you removed all rules and setting elements that inform the humanocentric view, you wouldn't be playing AD&D anymore (setting-wise).

If you allowed "weird" player characters, such as half storm giant/half pixie cross breeds, giants, balrogs, dragons, etc. you wouldn't be playing AD&D anymore. It should be noted that such "weirdness" does fall within the open-ended nature of the original D&D game.

 

[Valiant]

I was referring to AD&D specifically (and early AD&D...PH and DMG circa 78-81 or so).

I'm not as familiar with OD&D.

 

[Imp]

I only really really agree with #1 and #5 of Gentlegamer's list. Subsystems of AD&D can & have been taken out and added wholesale, but if you really change how combat works or you really change how magic works you are changing the core of the game. I guess I would also add "changing how attributes work" in that list, though I don't know many examples of people ever doing that.

I find the "humanocentric" perception of AD&D goes heavily against my experience (AD&D humans: pretty useless unless you get to high levels, which is hard, and level caps were frequently houseruled out; 3e's implementation of humans took an enormous stride to make things humanocentric) – and trying to play monsters as PCs was pretty common in AD&D, little though the system supported it.

The number of people who wanted to play gold dragons, man...