Diaglo: What's so great about OD&D?

[Odhanan]

I'm not Diaglo obviously, but maybe I can share my opinion about this.

First OD&D is, despite its archaic organization, fairly simple to understand, and extremely simple to use. The three classes are the simplest of all expressions of the game. If you want to be able to play D&D with kids, it may yet be the best of the systems available.

Second, OD&D is like a virgin system. It is made with the precise thought that anyway, as a DM or RPG group, you will houserule the system and create your own "Advanced" set. Because it is simple, you can take it in any direction you want over the years. And that's an advantage even an experienced roleplayer cannot neglect.

I thought several times of running games with the white box and taking the game in whatever direction we'd want at the game table, just to put ourselves in a "pioneer" position and see where it'd go from there with advanced rules of our own.

Third, OD&D is the first ruleset we've had in terms of RPGs. For some people, first is best, and anything following it is just a pale copy. That's the result of the "wow" factor of a first edition, a "wow" factor that just cannot be re-created by other products because it has already been done.

 

[Numion]

Second, OD&D is like a virgin system. It is made with the precise thought that anyway, as a DM or RPG group, you will houserule the system and create your own "Advanced" set.

Is this thought expressed implicitly or explicitly in the books? Anyway, it's strange if its either, because the creator of the game later made a statement in Dragon magazine that you should play the games exactly as written :\

Just interested .. not trying to kick up flame wars

 

[Odhanan]

Is this thought expressed implicitly or explicitly in the books? Anyway, it's strange if its either, because the creator of the game later made a statement in Dragon magazine that you should play the games exactly as written

I don't think Gary escapes what plagues most of us human beings, including you, me, and everyone at times: contradiction. It is the same E.G. Gygax who was raving about the buzz created by OD&D that went on and allowed a selection of advanced rules in the form of AD&D (in the introduction of the 1E player's handbook or DMG if I'm not mistaken).

Others will tell you that this wasn't what Gary wrote. He didn't write that the game SHOULD be played the way it is written. He said that "people playing alternate rules wouldn't be playing [A]D&D (maybe it's [O], don't remember which one) because [A]D&D is the game as in RAW." That's nitpicking in the end.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I think that quote was referring to tournament play, at least I think it was. After all he says in the DMG that the rules are guidelines and the DM has final call over what rules are used in the game. And Gary never used the RAW himself, since things like weapons speeds and such were never used in his games.

 

[Odhanan]

I agree with Flexor.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I agree with Flexor.

Famous last words in the old campaign Flexor was in.

 

[diaglo]

Just curious man. We all know you're a hardcore advocate of the game, so I wonder--why? Why is it the superior version of the game? What about OD&D is so mind-blowingly amazing that all subsequent editions of the game pale in comparison? I genuinely want to know.

last few times i tried to answer threads or start them myself about this very subject they got closed.

i have a few basic things i like in a game: KISS, rules as guidelines, and the ability to have fun.

OD&D does all of these.

Keeping it simple s'mon: few classes...(someone of faith/wisdom, someone of braun/str, and someone of brain/intelligence) few races ... (keeping to a small select few of the cooperative kind) and originally smaller fluctuations of what is done due to ability scores... (Supplement I Greyhawk introduced and in my opionion started the trend of powergaming with +2 , +3, or greater scores from stats)

rules as guidelines... the referee is the only one with the rulebooks. he has to make the rules interpretations. the players just roleplay their PC. if it ain't written in the rules then it is fair game to be included. if it is written, then it is upto the referee to let the players know how it will affect play.

having fun. who can't have fun getting together with friends and playing a cooperative game? lets pretend we aren't in a room. but on an adventure....

go here for more fun: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=82261

edit: or read about it http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=92669

 

[philreed]

if it ain't written in the rules then it is fair game to be included. if it is written, then it is upto the referee to let the players know how it will affect play.

How is this different from any other edition of D&D? This sounds exactly like what most of us do today.

 

[DragonLancer]

Why were prior posts/threads closed? odd.

 

[Cam Banks]

How is this different from any other edition of D&D? This sounds exactly like what most of us do today.

Hey! Speak for yourself!

I'm doing it tomorrow. Today, I'm writing.

Cheers,
Cam