Quasqueton said:
I want to ask a question of those of you playing the old game, but I don't want this to come across as an attack on the game. I don't want an edition war, but I'm curious.
If you play just a one-off, it may never come up. But if you are playing a campaign or other extended game, do the PCs ever need/want to try some actions not covered by the basic rules? Do the PCs never want to disarm an opponent? Grapple? Push them off a cliff? A cleric climb a wall? A magic-user hide? The fighter pull a stunt while on horseback? How do you handle jumping over a pit? The group sneaking past a guard post? Swimming? Etc.
Do these things never come up in your game? Do the Players kindly "play along" by not trying things not covered in the rules? Or do you have to make up rules for the actions on the spot? And how often?
If you make up rules, do you base the rule on something in D&D3? Or do you make them up completely whole clothe?
I loved playing Basic/Expert D&D (Moldvay/Cook), but we moved "up" to AD&D1 after a year or so. And even in AD&D, I often hit a need for a house rule to cover things the PCs wanted/needed to do. I had a fairly lengthy list of house rules for my game, but not to change the rules, rather to write down rules for things not covered.
So, how do you handle "rule heavy" needs for a "rules light" system?
Quasqueton
Quasqueton,
Most of the stuff you ask is already covered by the
Rules Cyclopedia. In fact, I believe the RC is more complete than the three 3e core books, as it cover addtional stuff, such as control of the land and mass combats. It is not as close as detailed than the 3e core books, but there are enough classes, spells, maneuvers, equipment, monsters, and treasure to fuel my campaign, not counting an overview of the world of Mystara and the Planes.
Being specific, any character in my game can ride a horse. If he try a stunt, I ask for a riding check. I will assign any bonus or penalty based in what I judge to be the overall dificulty of the stunt. When we are all in agree, he rolls the dice. Likewise, all other examples you cited are covered by the rules, although they leave to the DM the job of assigning the appropriate modifiers. In any case, if they do invent something that is not covered by the rules, I will probably make some call involving the apropriated skill or ability check and use my good sense.
To some people it might be strange to play in a game not so structured as 3e but, to me, it works better, as I bring a single book to the table and, even so, we don't look at the rules too much. My players thrust my calls with no or little debates, else they would be playing with a different DM (most of us run games from time to time). The game flows much faster and I am having much more fun than I was playing d20.
As you, I also moved to AD&D but, in its final days, I already realised that the
D&D game was a better one. I tried 3e, but eventually returned to the
Rules Cyclopedia. I already gone through my time with rules heavy systems (AD&D, 3e, Rolemaster, Chivalry & Sorcery, T2K), and I am now enjoying simpler games -- I am planning a
Traveller campaign using only
The Traveller Book later this year. You should look for the game that gives you the amount of complexity you're looking for. I am all for playability and rules lightness, but that's me.
Disarm situations are one of these... I don't know of any published rules system that handles disarm attempts in a way that I like - not 1e, not 3e, not any other game - and I tend to assign extremely low probabilities to PC disarm attempts in most situations.
