"Edited" by Moldvay. "Edited" by Cook. But who WROTE it?

I think Tim Kask suggested that they were so into the war gamer mentality when writing the rules that they didnt consider that many of the things wouldnt make any sense to anyone coming from a non-war gamer background.

-Havard

You know I've seen this idea passed around quite often and I think it's ridiculous.

If you compare the OD&D rulebook with any published wargame at the time, it still looks horribly amateur and confusing. For example, Panzerblitz came out in 1970 and has a tiny rulebook too but it is well written and the rules are very clear. It also well illustrated unlike the childish scribbles found in OD&D. I love D&D, but please, the original rulebooks were a travesty of design. They had plenty of wargame rulebooks to look to as examples of how to write a rulebook, so there's really no excuse other than they didn't put much thought into it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I love D&D, but please, the original rulebooks were a travesty of design. They had plenty of wargame rulebooks to look to as examples of how to write a rulebook, so there's really no excuse other than they didn't put much thought into it.

Yep, I agree completely. Not to mention the fact that OD&D was an incomplete game -- you needed the Chainmail rules to run combat. Though I suppsoe that one could make the case that OD&D was an expansion for Chainmail rather than a stand-alone game in the beginning.

As novel and important as the 1974 release is in establishing the RPG concept, the Basic re-writes are what (IMO) really opened D&D up to the masses.
 

Yep, I agree completely. Not to mention the fact that OD&D was an incomplete game -- you needed the Chainmail rules to run combat. Though I suppsoe that one could make the case that OD&D was an expansion for Chainmail rather than a stand-alone game in the beginning.

I hear this so often, but it is utter balderdash. I'm sorry, but it is.

I started playing with OD&D rules, never saw chainmail in my life, and it was all great. More than great, it was WONDERFUL! Supplement 1 (Greyhawk) improved things further.

I see lots of people with some kind of fixation on chainmail, and wargame beginnings underpinning everything but I was there, and chainmail... just wasn't!*

The rules were simple, straightforward, fired the imagination and just worked.

'Basic' may have opened up D&D to a more general public, I don't know about that. But 15 year olds had no difficulty in getting to grips with OD&D and running with it, forming part of the foundational userbase that everything else built upon.

* maybe some people found it helpful. Maybe some people found it vital - but I can tell you that in the 1970's, it was never mentioned in any of the many amateur magazines, APA's or professional magazines such as White Dwarf.
 
Last edited:

I hear this so often, but it is utter balderdash. I'm sorry, but it is. [snip]

I see lots of people with some kind of fixation on chainmail, and wargame beginnings underpinning everything but I was there, and chainmail... just wasn't!*

The rules were simple, straightforward, fired the imagination and just worked.

Hear hear! :D

And: "You must spread some Experience Points around before giving it to Plane Sailing again."
 

You know I've seen this idea passed around quite often and I think it's ridiculous.

If you compare the OD&D rulebook with any published wargame at the time, it still looks horribly amateur and confusing. For example, Panzerblitz came out in 1970 and has a tiny rulebook too but it is well written and the rules are very clear. It also well illustrated unlike the childish scribbles found in OD&D. I love D&D, but please, the original rulebooks were a travesty of design. They had plenty of wargame rulebooks to look to as examples of how to write a rulebook, so there's really no excuse other than they didn't put much thought into it.
From what I read back in the day, it was just supposed to be a fantasy supplement for chainmail, using the new(ish) concept of one character per mini. And, also from what I read, the reason for its total amateurness was that they wanted to get it out Right Now because people had been begging, no demanding, that they do so! There were mimeo'd copies of some house rules floating around and those interested wanted a real rules set badly. So I heard.
 

I hear this so often, but it is utter balderdash. I'm sorry, but it is.

I started playing with OD&D rules, never saw chainmail in my life, and it was all great. More than great, it was WONDERFUL! Supplement 1 (Greyhawk) improved things further.

I see lots of people with some kind of fixation on chainmail, and wargame beginnings underpinning everything but I was there, and chainmail... just wasn't!*

The rules were simple, straightforward, fired the imagination and just worked.

Well, clearly you were much smarter than I was at that age. I can't judge your experience, but I can relay my own, which was that reading the OD&D rules, after reading the BD&D rulebook (and having experience in wargames like PanzerBlitz, Tobruk, and Squad Leader), I was completely flummoxed:

- The cover reads "Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures" ... so coming from a wargaming background, I was expecting a complete product.

- The "Recommended equipment" on Page 5 of Volume 1 included two other games; Outdoor Survival and Chainmail.

- The "alternative combat system" on page 19 of volume one has some tables, but no explanation of how they were to be used.

- Page 8 of Volume 3 mentions that "Melee is fast an furious. There are ten rounds of combat per turn." But then goes on to talk about secret passages. The surprise paragraph below that talks about a "free move segment", with no prior references to move segments and how many there are or how they interact with the "rounds" and "turns" previously mentioned.

- The example of play at least clears up how exploring goes, and on page 15 of volume 3 we finally get the reference to OUTDOOR SURVIVAL, where it says that "off-hand adventures in the wilderness are made on the OUTDOOR SURVIVAL playing board," with a page of information on how to use the ponds on said board as castles and such-like, though subsequent references to blank hex paper make it clear you can work around that requirement.

- Then on page 25 of volume 3 we get to a discussion of combat and hear "The basic system is that from CHAINMAIL, .... Melee can be conducted with the combat tabl;e given from Volume I" [How, there is no explanation?] "or by the CHAINMAIL system." It goes on on that page to talk about written combat orders and how missile firing is allowable at the end of a turn, and after a page of air-to-ground combat tables another cryptic reference to combat taking place when you are within melee range of 3" ... but again no explanation of how combat is to be conducted.

- Finally on page 31 of Volume 3 we get to MELEE, which reads "Use Man-to-Man rules as found in CHAINMAIL." There are some subsequent notes but none which explain how combat is to be handled. GREYHAWK has an "Alternative Combat Section", but that's just a damage modification table by weapon time.

I'm sure many groups took the mix of information available and created a combat system that decided who went in what order, and what takes place when in combat, and how spellcasting mixed with that melee and missile firing. But I reiterate my experience: by reading the rulebooks themselves, the game is incomplete, and a reference to other material, or retroactive experience (in my case from the BD&D rulebook) is needed to puzzle out the game.

Don't get me wrong, OD&D is great, but I think any view of it as being in some way complete or self-contained is a view through nostalgic rose-colored glasses.

If you feel otherwise, my challenge to you is this: explain how a combat containing melee, missile fire, and spellcasting is conducted using only direct references from the three volumes of the OD&D rulebooks.
 
Last edited:

Perhaps Basic was well enough written that looking at OD&D after reading it made the latter seem crude and ill written; I could easily understand that being the case.

However, my comment still stands. At that time, whatever wargame roots there might have been in chainmail were invisible to me, my friends, the people at the wargames club I went to and all the publications at the time!

We found a game which was complete enough for us to play for several years (albeit with the gradual addition of Greyhawk, Blackmoor, Eldritch Wizardry, a couple of issues of Strategic Review before AD&D finally appeared)

Plus of course we were all genius's whose talent still sadly goes unrecognised in the world of work ;)

Cheers
 

From what I read back in the day, it was just supposed to be a fantasy supplement for chainmail, using the new(ish) concept of one character per mini. And, also from what I read, the reason for its total amateurness was that they wanted to get it out Right Now because people had been begging, no demanding, that they do so! There were mimeo'd copies of some house rules floating around and those interested wanted a real rules set badly. So I heard.

Again, I don't know where and when you read and heard this, but I was back in the day, it was sold as a standalone game (not a fantasy supplement), and it was absolutely groundbreaking in a way that it is hard to comprehend by looking back on it.

It was amateur in the true sense of the word - it was a work by lovers of the subject. In those years there were amateur publications, amateur newsletters, amateur publishing associations. It was a wild and woolly frontier which fired the imagination! I never came across anyone back then who looked at the rules and said 'that seems a bit crumby' - everyone said 'I get to be Conan/Ged/Gandalf/Arthur!'
 


- The "alternative combat system" on page 19 of volume one has some tables, but no explanation of how they were to be used.

Not true.

One axis of the table is clearly labeled "20-Sided Die Score to Hit By Level". And directly below the table is: "All attacks which score hits do 1-6 points of damage unless otherwise noted."

On page 18 we read: "(Hit Dice): This indicates the number of dice which are rolled in order to determine how many hit points a character can take. (...) being the number of points of damage the character could sustain before death."

The original OD&D manuals may be horribly organized and confusingly written, but it says "Gygax" on the cover so that doesn't come as a surprise. But the game described between those covers is completely playable without reference to any other document.
 

Remove ads

Top