Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 5917650" data-attributes="member: 92511">And, again, just a little. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />In fact, it is. You are posing that AD&amp;D &quot;changed&quot; and was &quot;intrusive&quot; into D&amp;D when they were not, in fact, the same (admittedly, very close) system...though intended to be easily exchanged between the two...to a point, or at least BD&amp;D was supposed to be able to be &quot;ported&quot; into AD&amp;D with minimal guff. I am posing that AD&amp;D was setting its own standard and rules and fluff (yes, mostly based on EGG's Greyhawk setting) where/when no other existed.So, the point that AD&amp;D was &quot;intrusive&quot; is really not accurate.I am referencing, and apologies for the confusion, I didn't realize they weren't identical, the 1983 Mentzer-edited version red box. And yes, Deities are presented, albeit peripherally, as I said before, in the DMG of that set. What's in the Moldvay red of '81, I cannot say.I agree. That's why I, at least, assume they are so handwaved.And, again, D&amp;D is not what 5e is. It is the fifth edition of the AD&amp;D game. Not a continuation of the &quot;basic/O&quot; D&amp;D game.OH! Then why am I writing at all? lol. It didn't come off as farcical...to me, anyway. Nary you mind, then. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />And I, respectfully, don't think it does.And still...that is what the popular support has given precedence to. Your assertion that AD&amp;D was &quot;intrusive&quot; as far as setting is concerned, when there WASN'T an established &quot;default&quot; setting before does not mesh with me.I'd still argue that AD&amp;D has the precendence...since the '81 version post-dates the original AD&amp;D 1e by 3 years...the '83, ya know, more. But you are correct, the original &quot;Basic&quot; was in tandem with 1e...so how does either hold precedence over (or become intrusive) on the other?&nbsp;Happily. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />--SD</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 5917650, member: 92511"] And, again, just a little. ;) In fact, it is. You are posing that AD&D "changed" and was "intrusive" into D&D when they were not, in fact, the same (admittedly, very close) system...though intended to be easily exchanged between the two...to a point, or at least BD&D was supposed to be able to be "ported" into AD&D with minimal guff. I am posing that AD&D was setting its own standard and rules and fluff (yes, mostly based on EGG's Greyhawk setting) where/when no other existed. So, the point that AD&D was "intrusive" is really not accurate. I am referencing, and apologies for the confusion, I didn't realize they weren't identical, the 1983 Mentzer-edited version red box. And yes, Deities are presented, albeit peripherally, as I said before, in the DMG of that set. What's in the Moldvay red of '81, I cannot say. I agree. That's why I, at least, assume they are so handwaved. And, again, D&D is not what 5e is. It is the fifth edition of the AD&D game. Not a continuation of the "basic/O" D&D game. OH! Then why am I writing at all? lol. It didn't come off as farcical...to me, anyway. Nary you mind, then. :D And I, respectfully, don't think it does. And still...that is what the popular support has given precedence to. Your assertion that AD&D was "intrusive" as far as setting is concerned, when there WASN'T an established "default" setting before does not mesh with me. I'd still argue that AD&D has the precendence...since the '81 version post-dates the original AD&D 1e by 3 years...the '83, ya know, more. But you are correct, the original "Basic" was in tandem with 1e...so how does either hold precedence over (or become intrusive) on the other? Happily. ;) --SD [/QUOTE]

Verification