Can someone explain what "1st ed feel" is?

[Desdichado]

To each his own. The rest of the RPG industry (by which I mean non-D&D -- this is a tough call now with d20, though) is pretty uniformly anti-1st edition feel, and have the theory that the setting sells the game, not the mechanics. Before d20, in which the name and the customizability, not to mention the user base through that theory for a loop, I'd say that was probably true. So 1st edition feel is an anachronism and those who get all misty-eyed about it probably truly do so more from nostalgia rather than quality.

The rather ironic subtext in all of these debates is that those who praise the 1st edition modules do so because it allowed the DMs to customize and add in all the stuff they wanted. Take that one more step, though, and what point is there for printing a module in the first place? Just let the DM come up with his own adventure, if you're going to make him do most of the work anyway. Personally, I'm not a big fan of published adventures: the Witchfire Trilogy is the only one(s) I own (although I'm thinking about picking up the Freeport series.) To me, the 1st edition feel is making up your own stuff because you had to. And for that, 3rd edition is better anyway, because it's so modular in design and easily customizable, yet you have a lot more building blocks to work with.

 

[D'karr]

Conflicting Views

I guess we agree, then, on what they were like; we just disagree on whether that's a good thing.

Daniel

In a previous post you mentioned Speaker in Dreams and how you had spent so much time changing it.

You seem to contradict yourself.

1E had very vague if any setting references. Even the Classics, Slavers Campaign, Against the Giants Campaign, Queen of Spiders Campaign, before they were made into MegaModules had very vague setting references. They could losely be made into a grand overarching campaign if the DM wanted to but he could also play each series individually with no connection at all. That connection was left up to the DM to create.

In my opinion that was great. I wasn't using a Greyhawk Campaign and I modified names and locations to fit my campaign. Hardly any real hassle.

BTW the Slavers Campaign [A1-A4] was one of my favorites and the group that played it still reminesces about it almost 20 years after.

Now back to 3E. I happen to like 3E better than any of the previous systems. The reason why I like it better is because it allows me to concentrate on story over game mechanics. The game mechanics are so simple that I can make consistent game rulings in even the most absurd of situations without much thought. It gives me the feeling I had when I first played Basic & Expert Set D&D.

The DM provides the logic/plausibility to a published module. Granted some modules are easier to provide this for. However, it is still the DMs responsibility. Speaker in Dreams was heavily modified in my campaign. Not because it was implausible as you mentioned but because the events just didn't fit.

 

[jasamcarl]

No, Joshua

You still don't get it....what Colonel and others are getting at (as i understand it, not having actually played 1st ed) is that the 2nd ed modules actually required MORE work because they were high on flavor (which IS very easy to do), and low on mechanics, which is much more difficult for various reasons of balance, limitations on rules, etc. Seriously, mechanics are much more marketable than fluff, because their is simply a dearth of it. Not to mention an over abundance of setting material can add a lot more work on the flavor text, in so far as the extra detail calls for too many assumptions about the grand strategic bent of a dm's campaign...

 

[Darkness]

It means if you are playnig a wizard (magic user back then) don't expect to survive beyond first level let alone second. Especially after you have used up all your darts.

Yeah, but if you survive longer than level 9 or so, you will 0wnx0r the game.
OTOH, if you're a thief (that's "rogue" for us youngsters), you don't have a point in surviving longer than level 5-7 or so.

And for me, an illogical dungeon shoots my suspension of disbelief all to hell. We were playing through RttToEE recently (VERY MINOR SPOILER), and in going through one complex, I noted the corridors that travel only in cardinal directions but that wind all around. You go 20' north, then 50' east, then 10' north, then 20' west, then....

Digging underground is hard, even with magical help. Why on earth would anyone make their corridors wind all over creation, when they could just make the corridors be straight shots from one location to another? Even something that small can get under my skin.

Well, if you were madder than heck, chaotic evil, and had easy access to lots of (also evil) earth elementals, you might do something like that.

First edition feel is sitting on my bed reading and re-reading the books.

I don't think I played in a real group until college-- well into 2e. Up until then, never more than one player, one DM-- and sometimes they were both me.

Wulf

Heh. Y'know, Wulf, I started that way as well! (I managed to get a group after a year or two, though.)

The irony of what you said Daniel is that you explain away so easily that the tunnels can be molded by MAGIC, but you find little else PLAUSIBLE (wind in tunnels)...

Actually almost ANYTHING taken to their logical conclusion is rather alien. Even in the real world there is a lot that is not logical, because we are not purely calculating engines...

*shrug* my opinion of course

"Truth is stranger than fiction."

 

[Darkness]

And for me, an illogical dungeon shoots my suspension of disbelief all to hell. We were playing through RttToEE recently (VERY MINOR SPOILER), and in going through one complex, I noted the corridors that travel only in cardinal directions but that wind all around. You go 20' north, then 50' east, then 10' north, then 20' west, then....

Digging underground is hard, even with magical help. Why on earth would anyone make their corridors wind all over creation, when they could just make the corridors be straight shots from one location to another? Even something that small can get under my skin.

Well, if you were madder than heck, chaotic evil, and had easy access to lots of (also evil) earth elementals, you might do something like that.

 

[Pielorinho]

Well, if you were madder than heck, chaotic evil, and had easy access to lots of (also evil) earth elementals, you might do something like that.

In that case, you'd probably make the corridors curvy, dontcha think? Not with all sorts of right angles and corridors that are perfectly 10' wide at all points.

But if you were madder than heck, chaotic evil, with easy access to lots of earth elementals, AND OBSESSIVE COMPULSIVE, then you might do something like that.

Or, if you were a DM, you might think, "mapping straight passages is boring. I'll make 'em windy, that'll be fun!"

That, to me, is 1E thinking.

Daniel

 

[Darkness]

In that case, you'd probably make the corridors curvy, dontcha think? Not with all sorts of right angles and corridors that are perfectly 10' wide at all points.

But if you were madder than heck, chaotic evil, with easy access to lots of earth elementals, AND OBSESSIVE COMPULSIVE, then you might do something like that.

Or, if you were a DM, you might think, "mapping straight passages is boring. I'll make 'em windy, that'll be fun!"

That, to me, is 1E thinking.

Daniel

Yeah, LOL, and that's just what the good Colonel was saying: You had to make up explanations for a lot of things 'cause nobody gave them to you.
Heh. Seems like I'm able to grasp a bit of the 1e feel after reading this thread. Never played 1e, though; I started with AD&D in '89 or '90...

 

[Pielorinho]

The irony of what you said Daniel is that you explain away so easily that the tunnels can be molded by MAGIC, but you find little else PLAUSIBLE (wind in tunnels)...

This confused the hell out of me on the first couple of readings. Wind in tunnels? Who said anything about wind in tunnels?

And then I reread what I'd written about windy passages.

Aha.

Not gusty passages. Convoluted passages. WINE-dee passages.

Wind in passages is no problem, as long as there's a reason for it!

Daniel
shooting the breeze

 

[Melan]

To each his own. The rest of the RPG industry (by which I mean non-D&D -- this is a tough call now with d20, though) is pretty uniformly anti-1st edition feel, and have the theory that the setting sells the game, not the mechanics. Before d20, in which the name and the customizability, not to mention the user base through that theory for a loop, I'd say that was probably true. So 1st edition feel is an anachronism and those who get all misty-eyed about it probably truly do so more from nostalgia rather than quality.

The rather ironic subtext in all of these debates is that those who praise the 1st edition modules do so because it allowed the DMs to customize and add in all the stuff they wanted. Take that one more step, though, and what point is there for printing a module in the first place? Just let the DM come up with his own adventure, if you're going to make him do most of the work anyway. Personally, I'm not a big fan of published adventures: the Witchfire Trilogy is the only one(s) I own (although I'm thinking about picking up the Freeport series.) To me, the 1st edition feel is making up your own stuff because you had to. And for that, 3rd edition is better anyway, because it's so modular in design and easily customizable, yet you have a lot more building blocks to work with.

On Settings: Joshua: yes, the rest of The Industry (as they refer to themselves) is mostly anti-first edition feel, focusing on settings versus rules. And they, collectively, aren't much larger than D&D on its own. They never were (except for maybe White Wolf in its early years), and, most likely, never be. On the other hand, D&D and Hackmaster (which is 100% old school gaming, 1st edition feel and all) sell like, well, some really well selling stuff. One of the keys to this is precisely the holy "setting" (and the lack thereof in D&D). Gamers like to invent worlds and D&D allows, nay, encourages you to do just that. Vampire can't do that for me, and neither can Tribe 8, Blue Planet or Orkworld. Oh sure, my home setting isn't original at all (being composed of a few maps on hex sheets, another sheet that has the settlements with population figures and a few other details, other details being stored in my mind. And the meat: lots of adventures, both stolen and home-grown.
This is one of the core strength of 1e: it allowed the seamless integration of modules and supplements into your own world. Can you drop "Steading of the Hill Giant chief" in an average campaign? Yes, most likely. Can you use the 1e DMG encounter tables? Yes, or you can make your own based on them - just a few changes and you are set. Can you do the same to the reindeer-riding orks from Orkworld? No, you can't. Chances are, your campaign can't accomodate them. Naturally, the rest of The Industry (tm) can't get away with focusing on rules and modules - they must focus on something WotC doesn't do as well (and which caused the downfall of TSR, among other reasons), and that is the creation of detailed worlds (BESM might be a rare exception, or maybe FUDGE?). A significant portion of D&D players couldn't care less about cool settings - we want modules we can use in our own crappy fantasy worlds. And 1st edition adventures were nice in this respect - generic, adaptable, full of cool ideas...


On nostalgia: I don't think it is merely nostalgia. In that case, I wouldn't enjoy it - I am younger than the G series, but I still prefer it to Terrible Trouble of Tragidore or the other zillion crappy adventures that came out in the 90s. There must surely be something that makes them attractible to me. - And also that new contestants in this area (Necromancer and Fiery Dragon) make fun modules I can run and my players enjoy...

 

[Pielorinho]

I'm also gonna point out that my problems with Speaker in Dreams wasn't the need to customize it. Changing the city's bell tower into a mosaic-covered tower with a Rapunzel-like legend attached to it was fun, and wasn't a problem with the adventure at all. Changing the town's main industry to glassworks, changing the Baron to a Rais, changing the Stony Gaze Tavern to the Golden Veil Inn -- all these are things I expect to do in customizing an adventure.

But when I'm faced with a collection of random villains with no reason for their cooperation; when the tactics described for the villains do no credit to their intelligence; when humans villains seem to be working with critters that ought to be killing them -- that's when I have a problem.

And that's the kind of thing I think is even more rampant in 1E modules, from what I remember. My first adventure was In Search of the Unknown -- 'nuff said?

Daniel