Back to the future

[Philotomy Jurament]

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.

The B/X rules (1981) are a great choice. I handle available skills the same way you do (does it make sense for your PC?), but I use a d20-style ability check with a DC rather than the roll-under approach. (I really like C&C's approach to handling skills, and use it when I run classic D&D, too.)

Regarding Classic D&D, I think Robert Fisher's site has some good ideas (e.g. Two-Weapon Fighting) and some good explanations of how Classic D&D's approach is often misunderstood or caricatured. I think a "Behind the Curtain" understanding of how Classic D&D approaches things goes a long way towards answering common criticisms of the system.

 

[Nifft]

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

("...hard work and sacrifice"?!)

Alright, that's enough. No-one ever thinks of the hard work and sacrifice that went into 3rd edition.

Do you know how many interns were seriously injured in determining that the bonus granted by the Charge action is exactly +2? And that was just one rule. RPG design is not pretty, and it's not funny. We should never forget those who suffered so that we may have plausible rules.

Jeez. -- N

 

[Harmon]

Well as usual someone completely misunderstands my POV. I suppose I should just come in with an- “OD&D sucks” and get over with it, but that is not my POV, just what people seem to think I am saying.

Akrasia- it was never my intent for anyone to misunderstand what I was trying to say- if you feel the need to attack rather then debate or help me understand why OD&D is better or a reasonable system to play, then I suppose your opinions really aren’t worth reading. If you wish to apologizes then I will accept, but you seem (to my POV) to want to just assume that I have made up my mind while in truth I am seeking to understand why anyone would want to drive a Modal T when a brand new 2006 automobile is sitting right there.

MM I am sorry that this thread has been hijacked, it seems that as usually my statements have been misunderstood, my questions interrupted as condescension and answers as attacks.

No one here seems to be able to or perhaps want to assist me in understanding the appeal of OD&D. So once again, and with all honesty- my apologizes.

 

[Akrasia]

...Akrasia- it was never my intent for anyone to misunderstand what I was trying to say- if you feel the need to attack rather then debate or help me understand why OD&D is better or a reasonable system to play, then I suppose your opinions really aren’t worth reading. If you wish to apologizes then I will accept, but you seem (to my POV) to want to just assume that I have made up my mind while in truth I am seeking to understand why anyone would want to drive a Modal T when a brand new 2006 automobile is sitting right there....

I'm not going to apologise for pointing out the unwarranted assumptions in your 'query', viz. your assumption that RPGs are akin to automobiles, and thus OD&D must be a 'Model T' in contrast to 3e's '2006 automobile'. I find that to be an absurd notion. OD&D and 3e are quite different games, with very different advantages and disadvantages. Which one is better for a group depends on what that group wants out of their games. Simply because 3e is 'newer' and you like it better does not mean that it is 'objectively better', anymore than the latest video game is 'superior' to chess. (I write this as someone presently playing 3e and not playing OD&D.)

...
MM I am sorry that this thread has been hijacked, it seems that as usually my statements have been misunderstood, my questions interrupted as condescension and answers as attacks.

No one here seems to be able to or perhaps want to assist me in understanding the appeal of OD&D. So once again, and with all honesty- my apologizes.

Ummm, many people have tried to reply to your query by indicating why OD&D might appeal to certain gamers. Most noticeably, Philotomy Jurament has given you some thoughtful answers, as well as links to where you might find more thoughts on the merits of OD&D.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

No one here seems to be able to or perhaps want to assist me in understanding the appeal of OD&D.

I posted a couple of links (one to a previous thread where people explained why they like playing OD&D, an one to Robert Fisher's site on classic D&D). To me, the appeal is that older versions of D&D strike a good balance between rules and freedom. Where you want to be on the rules vs. freedom scale is a matter of opinion, which is why your comments about the current version having better rules or being more evolved or being a modern auto vs. a Model T have annoyed some people.

I think the 3E rules are carefully balanced and reasonably consistent. I think they're good, especially if you want a very detailed, tactical, quantified game. If that's what you want, then the 3E rules are better for your purposes. If that's not what you want, then they're not better.

For my main game, I much prefer lighter set of rules (i.e. more towards the freedom end of the scale). In a given game situation, classic D&D tends to rely much more on DM and player judgment, rather than having quantified rules for everything. I've been DMing since the late 70s, and I like to be able to exercise my creativity and judgment rather than being a rules-looker-upper. I also think that players tend to think "outside the box" more when they don't have have their abilities and skills quantified and listed. Personally, I find lists of skills and feats restrictive, since they tell you what you can do, but also tend to define what you CAN'T do.

Note that I'm not saying 3E is bad. I still play 3E (although I have no desire to DM it, anymore). I do think it's plays like a very different game. I disagree with you about rules not contributing to the feel of the game; I think they contribute a huge amount to how a game plays and feels.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

For that genuine OD&D feel, don't forget a crayon to ink your 0-9 d20.

I have a black d20 with white 0-9 and red 0-9 that I call my "old school die." My 10-year-old son seems to believe it has supernatural powers and tends to roll high. I encourage this by calling it my "black magic death die," as well as the "old school die." I break it out for big fights. Its appearance always elicits moans and groans from the players.

My son has tried his hand at DMing a few times, and always wants to borrow/use my old-school die.

 

[Orius]

Why did the 3e side have to start the edition wars fight here? I much prefer it when the bitter old grognards pick the fight by complaining how all post-Gygax D&D sucks. Here they were just sitting back happy and peaceful with their preconceptions. This makes the pro-3e side look bad....

To be more serious, I wouldn't really want to play the original game. When I read it, it just doesn't feel like it has its own identity. That comes later, with the B/E/M/C/I rules, or AD&D/3e. Even with the more internally consistant stuff posted on the websites listed above, it stilll doesn't feel like it has any identity of its own.

 

[Harmon]

Why did the 3e side have to start the edition wars fight here?....

My intent was to understand why someone would want to play OD&D, because I see no appeal to it, PJ did a fair job in explaining his POV about they difference, but no one else did they seemed to think I was attacking OD&D and the Players of said edition.

Thank you PJ for taking the time, I appreciate the interest in my question.

Akrasia- you seem very angry. I am sorry that you feel so angered by my questions and interest, and feel that my analogies were attacks on your interest. I hope you can forgive a curious person. I do not want this construed in some way that makes you feel that I am being condescending- I was truly curious and I am truly apologizing to you for the misunderstanding.

Take care, peace all.

 

[Akrasia]

... Akrasia- you seem very angry...

No, not angry. I'm not sure why you got that impression. If anything, I was amused.

 

[MonsterMash]

Hello, MM,

For that genuine OD&D feel, don't forget a crayon to ink your 0-9 d20.

The DM has some Lou Zocchi dice from back then with the 0-9 on the D20. Need to try and find myself some, and of course we may only need D20 and D6 depending on what rules we use.