• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Back to the future

I have played OD&D (Rules Cyclopedia) for years and years.
I have on group who changed to AD&D, but they play about once a year....

Over the years, I have regularly taken a good look at AD&D.

Splitting up class and race was a good idea, but the implementation stank.

When third edition came out, my first reaction was:
'Yes! they have gotten it right this time!'
My second reaction was:
'I am going to use some of these rules to 'upgrade' my D&D rules'.

And i did. starting with attack bonus vs Thac0, reversed armor class counting, and the possibility to increase skills with points instead of 'taking a skill' and having it at a fixed number for the rest of your character's career.

Eventually, i started playing in third edition groups.

The following happened in my playstyle as a result:

1. Where in the past, I knew all rules by heart, or at least what page they were on '-), I now have to look up rules. This is unavoidable with new rulesets, I know, but I have the feeling that with the multitude of rules, and with all the errata, expansions etc. coming out I will never be able to play a session without having to look something up. (and I don't mean a table....)
2. Where in the past I or other players would state what we would do, and the DM would figure out how much bonusses or penalties that would give on your attack roll, now we dig into our books to find out which rules apply. And we know there are rules for virtually every action you can possibly take in a combat situation.
3. If a certain action is NOT in the rules, the tendency is to say 'it cannot be done' because it is not in the rules....

What, in fact, third edition has done to me and my friends, is turn me from a roleplayer into a ruleplayer.

Ever since I realised that, I keep looking back at OD&D, and the simplicity of that system.

Now, don't get me wrong. I love third edition, I love playing third edition, I really like the possibilities it offers in multiclassing, prestige classes, feat selection, etc.

I currently thing the only thing third edition really misses is a feat-like system for class-abilities (which would make it simpler to create your own classes and prestige classes).

But still, there is something to say for pushing the rules into the background (where they belong, IMNSHO) and roleplaying...

Herzog
 

log in or register to remove this ad





Harmon said:
Harmon is stunned that someone would want to go back to OD&D.
Not too long ago, we had a pretty good thread about why people still play OD&D.

Personally, I prefer classic D&D (B/X or BECMI) over OD&D (1974), but I imagine my appreciation of classic D&D and other peoples' appreciation of OD&D share similar roots and reasons. I agree with you that the game has evolved, but 3E plays and feels like a very different game from earlier editions, IMO; in other words, it's evolved into "something else." Two of my favorite systems (Castles & Crusades and Basic Fantasy RPG) borrow from d20 while maintaining the same feel of older editions.
 

Melan said:
Harmon: it is because Monster Mash is a knuckle-dragging Neanderthal. Who wears rose coloured glasses. That' why. :]

Doesn't explain the appeal, but okay. :o

A game having a certain feel is not rules dependant, the rules make a game better or wrose, in some cases the lack of rules makes it worse thus the evolving of the game makes it better.

Again, sorry if anyone took offense, but I still do not see the appeal. OD&D was great for what it was, but the involvement of thousands of people has made D&D better, and going back is like ignoring all the hard work and sacrifice that they all did. It just doesn't make sense to me that you have to go back to get a feeling of the way the game should be.

Again, apologizes. MM and everyone else- hope you all have fun on your next and future game days. :)
 

Harmon said:
A game having a certain feel is not rules dependant, the rules make a game better or wrose, in some cases the lack of rules makes it worse thus the evolving of the game makes it better.
It boils down to "better" being subjective. I think 3E is well designed and good at what it does, but I prefer a different approach for my main game.
 

Harmon said:
... I mean the rules are so much better now, the system is better ....

It's always amusing when people confuse their subjective preferences for objective facts. :)

Harmon said:
... the involvement of thousands of people has made D&D better, and going back is like ignoring all the hard work and sacrifice that they all did...

And moralising one's subjetive preferences is even more amusing. :lol:

("...hard work and sacrifice"?!)
 

Man in the Funny Hat said:
Because MORE rule is not always better. Think of it as -exercising- your imagination rather than just letting it stuff its face while lounging on the sofa.


Our group is looking at doing a couple pick-up sessions with the 1981 basic/expert rules. It will be so much more relaxing being able to play rather than recite rules :)

Skill checks bah! The real question is "would your character know something like that?" Ok, make an ability check on a d20.

jh
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top