AD&D 1E Edition Experience: Did/Do you Play 1E AD&D? How Was/Is It?

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The funny thing is, I've been running a Cyberpunk Red campaign for over a year, and it pretty much requires an in-game calendar be kept. And it really does make the campaign more meaningful. When you've got rent due at the end of the month, every day you spend healing, hustling, crafting is a day you can't spend on the more lucrative gigging.

My play by post campaign (going since 2006) has characters all over the world, side campaigns, split groups, etc., and if we didn't have a detailed timeline that explains who was where when, and what they were doing, it would be a contradictory mess.

I don't know if it meets Gygax's "strict timekeeping" definition, but it definitely is important in my game, which isn't even a West Marches.

 

[haakon1]

Well met, traveler! Allow me to introduce myself. I'm but a lowly reptilian expert in the Basic Edition. <tips tiny hat>

Actually, they're telling me I misspoke. Apparently, I'm an amphibian.

I stand corrected as well.

While I still don’t “know” anyone who actually played Basic, I should have been more respectful of the fact that somebody somewhere played it.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

My play by post campaign (going since 2006) has characters all over the world, side campaigns, split groups, etc., and if we didn't have a detailed timeline that explains who was where when, and what they were doing, it would be a contradictory mess.

I don't know if it meets Gygax's "strict timekeeping" definition, but it definitely is important in my game, which isn't even a West Marches.

With a campaign of that complexity, you really need to track time. I mean, I guess you could get away with not, but after a certain point you're going to start running into the walls, not knowing who is where when, doing what.

I remember when I did the math on my Tomb of Annihilation campaign - had I been keeping strict time, everyone afflicted with the Death Curse would've been long-since doomed.

 

[Lanefan]

This bit surprises me; I read Gary as extremely prescriptive in many parts of the 1E PH and DMG. He definitely says you can and should customize the rules once you understand them, but he also spells out best practices and modifications to OD&D play procedures and expectations in a very opinionated way, like how he gets really negative about monster PCs in contrast to how he was encouraging of them in 1974 OD&D. He tells us over and over again what a "well planned" and "well judged campaign" looks like and how it should be run. Sometimes in all caps, like when he tells us that when you have an open world game with different PCs operating independently, that "YOU CAN NOT HAVE A MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN IF STRICT TIME RECORDS ARE NOT KEPT."

Telling DMs to keep good records of in-game time isn't dictating or even suggesting a play type or play style, it's just good solid DM advice no matter what you're otherwise doing with the game.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

With a campaign of that complexity, you really need to track time. I mean, I guess you could get away with not, but after a certain point you're going to start running into the walls, not knowing who is where when, doing what.

I remember when I did the math on my Tomb of Annihilation campaign - had I been keeping strict time, everyone afflicted with the Death Curse would've been long-since doomed.

I've also activated the ticking clock component of the Ptolus setting, now that everyone's high enough of a level to potentially do something about it (once their characters know what's going on -- I start each adventure telling the players how many months it is until the end of the world, but they don't yet know what's coming, beyond vague prophecies).

Time keeping now is especially important, because I will be triggering the apocalypse, if the PCs don't prevent it from happening.

 

[kermit4karate]

I've also activated the ticking clock component of the Ptolus setting, now that everyone's high enough of a level to potentially do something about it (once their characters know what's going on -- I start each adventure telling the players how many months it is until the end of the world, but they don't yet know what is coming, beyond vague prophecies).

Time keeping now is especially important, because I will be triggering the apocalypse, if the PCs don't prevent it from happening.

Triggering the apocalypse. Ah, good times...

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I stand corrected as well.

While I still don’t “know” anyone who actually played Basic, I should have been more respectful of the fact that somebody somewhere played it.

Thread 'Ya Basic! Trying To Understand the Perception of AD&D and the Sales of Basic'

Jul 11, 2022

In the thread about the sales figures of Basic and Advanced D&D, we are given a chart by @BenRiggs that compares the sales of Basic D&D (Holmes, Moldvay/Cook, Mentzer) to Advanced D&D (PHB+DMG) from 1979-1995. Later elaboration indicates that this does not include international sales, so it does not include the very successful versions of Basic that were translated and produced for the international market. The notable thing from the chart is that for almost all the years, sales of the Basic rules were close to, are higher, than the comparable AD&D rulebooks. These...

• Snarf Zagyg
• Replies: 66
• Forum: D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants

• 
• 

D&D General Thread 'Why ya gotta be so Basic? Understanding the Resurgence of Moldvay's Basic'

Nov 5, 2024

One of the most interesting things about history is that you see things happen over and over again. The same styles that were in, go out, and come back in. Which is great for those of us who hate buying clothes, because we just have to wait long enough, and we are hip to the fashion of today! WOOT!

Anyway, history doesn't always repeat, but it usually rhymes. Like jistery. With that in mind, one thing I have been fascinated by is how Moldvay's Basic D&D went from a footnote in D&D's history to a popular resurgence with both OSR-types and with people that are into TTRPG theory. LL Cool J...

• Snarf Zagyg
• Replies: 99
• Forum: *Dungeons & Dragons

• 
• 

 

[Mannahnin]

This part makes sense to me.


This bit surprises me; I read Gary as extremely prescriptive in many parts of the 1E PH and DMG. He definitely says you can and should customize the rules once you understand them, but he also spells out best practices and modifications to OD&D play procedures and expectations in a very opinionated way, like how he gets really negative about monster PCs in contrast to how he was encouraging of them in 1974 OD&D. He tells us over and over again what a "well planned" and "well judged campaign" looks like and how it should be run. Sometimes in all caps, like when he tells us that when you have an open world game with different PCs operating independently, that "YOU CAN NOT HAVE A MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN IF STRICT TIME RECORDS ARE NOT KEPT."

This is in strong contrast to, particularly, 2nd ed. Which goes out of its way over and over to say "you could run it this way, or that way, whichever the DM prefers".

Telling DMs to keep good records of in-game time isn't dictating or even suggesting a play type or play style, it's just good solid DM advice no matter what you're otherwise doing with the game.

Your paraphrase "keep good records of in-game time" is distinctly less strident and directive than "YOU CAN NOT HAVE A MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN IF STRICT TIME RECORDS ARE NOT KEPT."

I think the text supports my description very clearly. I quoted him from pages 12 and 37. I could cite a lot of other examples where he gives a firm and directive opinion about both the nature of the AD&D game and how it should be run. Basically the entirety of the introduction on page 9, for another good example, or The Monster as a Player Character on 21, or his instructions on boning, excuse me, JUDGING Thieves on page 19 , or his guidance on treasure placement on pages 91-92, which concludes with the following two paragraphs:

Another nadir of Dungeon Mastering is the "killer-dungeon" concept. These campaigns are a travesty of the role-playing adventure game, for there is no development and identification with carefully nurtured player personae. In such campaigns, the sadistic referee takes unholy delight in slaughtering endless hordes of hapless player characters with unavoidable death traps and horrific monsters set to ambush participants as soon as they set foot outside the door of their safe house. Only a few of these "killer dungeons" survive to become infamous, however, as their participants usually tire of the idiocy after a few attempts at enjoyable gaming. Some lucky ones manage to find another, more reasonable,campaign; but others, not realizing the perversion of their DM's campaign,give up adventure gaming and go back to whatever pursuits they followed in their leisure time before they tried D&D.

AD&D means to set right both extremes. Neither the giveaway game nor the certain death campaign will be lauded here. In point of fact, DMs who attempt to run such affairs will be drumming themselves out of the ranks of AD&D entirely. ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS aims at providing not only the best possible adventure game but also the best possible refereeing of such campaigns.

That's right folks, people who run the game wrong are "drumming themselves out of the ranks of AD&D entirely"!

 

[James Gasik]

Here's another fun quote. Remember kids, 3rd party products are the Devil!

 

[Greg K]

I played it for about eight years. I enjoyed the system up until the point that I was introduced to other fantasy RPG systems. I do, however, still have praise for many of the 1e modules such as L1: The Secret of Bone Hill, T1: The Temple of Elemental Evil, Against the Giants (G1-G3),