D&D 1E Favorite Obscure Rules from TSR-era D&D

[Alzrius]

3rd edition and later shifted the saves/defenses to be based on how you defend against it, but they also introduced variation in difficulty based on the power of the attacher.

Well, earlier editions did vary the difficulty based on the power of the attacker; it just wasn't standardized into how the number being rolled against was calculated. A specialist wizard casting a spell from their specialty school, in AD&D 2E, made the target save at a -1 penalty, but you had to look in the section about specialist wizards to find that rule. Little things like that were all over the place, rather than being consolidated.

 

[Mannahnin]

Well, earlier editions did vary the difficulty based on the power of the attacker; it just wasn't standardized into how the number being rolled against was calculated. A specialist wizard casting a spell from their specialty school, in AD&D 2E, made the target save at a -1 penalty, but you had to look in the section about specialist wizards to find that rule. Little things like that were all over the place, rather than being consolidated.

I think that example is very much the exception to the rule. The introduction of a minimal penalty imposed by specialist casters is an indication that some of the designers were starting to think about this kind of thing by 1989, but they were still keeping the impact as small as was mathematically possible to represent.

 

[the Jester]

I think that example is very much the exception to the rule. The introduction of a minimal penalty imposed by specialist casters is an indication that some of the designers were starting to think about this kind of thing by 1989, but they were still keeping the impact as small as was mathematically possible to represent.

A few monsters adjusted the difficulty of saves, especially when it involved poison. Giant centipedes gave you a +4 bonus to save against their relatively weak poison, I seem to recall a whole chart for random types of giant snake poisons in the MM2, etc. But you're right that it was the exception.

I do think basing save DCs on the monster is both cool and an improvement in design.

 

[Voadam]

There were also things like AD&D hold person having various adjustments to the save depending on how many people you targeted.

Hold Person (Enchantment/Charm)
Level: 2 Components: V, S, M
Range: 6” Casting Time: 5 segments
Duration: 4 rounds + 1 round/level Saving Throw: Neg.
Area of Effect: One to three
creatures
Explanation/Description: This spell holds immobile, and freezes in places, from
1-3 humans or humanoid creatures (see below) for 5 or more melee rounds.
The level of the cleric casting the hold person spell dictates the length of time
the effect will last. The basic duration is 5 melee rounds at 1st level, 6 rounds at
2nd level, 7 rounds at 3rd level, etc. If the spell is cast at three persons, each
gets a saving throw at the normal score; if only two persons are being
enspelled, each makes their saving throw at -1 on their die; if the spell is cast at
but one person, the saving throw die is at -2. Persons making their saving
throws are totally unaffected by the spell. Creatures affected by a hold person
spell are: brownies, dryads, dwarves, elves, gnolls, gnomes, goblins, half-elves,
halflings, half-orcs, hobgoblins, humans, kobolds, lizard men, nixies, orcs,
pixies, sprites, and troglodytes. The spell caster needs a small, straight piece of
iron as the material component of this spell.

 

[Starfox]

I had many DM's who were too lazy to calculate XP (and some who felt the 2e XP system was too slow for their tastes), so it wasn't unusual to be told "and everyone goes up a level". I didn't give it much thought at the time, but that really feels unfair to some classes.

Not the Cleric though. The Cleric had way too much power to level up as fast as they did.

The power a cleric got was a bribe to players to accept the cleric role.
The first class complaint I ever got as a DM was that playing the cleric was no fun.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Yep, I gotcha. What are your thoughts on the B/X and AD&D five saving throw model?

I am probably in the distinct minority on this one ... but I loved the old saving throw model, and while I like the "ease" of the new model, I prefer the older one.

The idea that your character got better at all saving throws as they levelled was appealing. And it just worked. IMO. On the other hand, while proficiency captures some of that, the ASI/optimization treadmill just means that even the mightiest PCs have easily targeted abilities. The one exception is the high level monk (with Diamond Soul), but even the high level monk will have some ability scores that aren't great.

 

[Starfox]

One effect of the AD&D save model was that different classes advanced differently. Fighters started out the worst, but since they advanced every 2 levels, they ended up very well. Magic-users were the opposite; starting out good, but advancing only every 6 levels.

 

[Voadam]

I did like some of the thematics of the old school saves, their general categories and how that could connect up to classes. Rod Staff Wands were zap rays that thieves should be pretty good at dodging compared with straight spells like charm person which magic users were good at resisting. Polymorph/Petrification is solid body integrity so fighters should be good there. Breath weapons should be either dodging or bracing against, I'd expect thieves and fighters to be good at that. Poison, paralysis, and death magic are either connecting or not so clerics being decent on those favor of the gods checks there seems right.

It did not always work out in practice, but there was a good basis for some thematically appropriate considerations.

I also really liked fighters getting better at everything progressively so that they had good saves mostly across the board as essentially a high level power.

 

[Quickleaf]

I am probably in the distinct minority on this one ... but I loved the old saving throw model, and while I like the "ease" of the new model, I prefer the older one.

The idea that your character got better at all saving throws as they levelled was appealing. And it just worked. IMO. On the other hand, while proficiency captures some of that, the ASI/optimization treadmill just means that even the mightiest PCs have easily targeted abilities. The one exception is the high level monk (with Diamond Soul), but even the high level monk will have some ability scores that aren't great.

I agree with you!

I've been writing personal RPG stuff again, taking my old setting (which I'd been trying to cram into modern D&D like a round peg into a square hole for a while) and just free-flowing with it. Sort of a fusion of B/X foundation with other things added. I was distilling saves down to just two: Body Save and Magic Save.

What are your thoughts on the number of saves in the game? Does tracking 5 saving throws (or 6 saving throws) feel like it makes more sense to you than having fewer saves (3 like 3e or even just 2 like I'm playing with)?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I agree with you!

I've been writing personal RPG stuff again, taking my old setting (which I'd been trying to cram into modern D&D like a round peg into a square hole for a while) and just free-flowing with it. Sort of a fusion of B/X foundation with other things added. I was distilling saves down to just two: Body Save and Magic Save.

What are your thoughts on the number of saves in the game? Does tracking 5 saving throws (or 6 saving throws) feel like it makes more sense to you than having fewer saves (3 like 3e or even just 2 like I'm playing with)?

Well, I am biased because I played for SO LONG with the five saves I know them like the back of my hand.

Wait. Why do people say that? I don't ever really look at the back of my hand. Hmmm... I know them like I know my hatred of bards. That's better. Ahem. Anyway, I love the five saves. But that's just because of me, not because they are intrinsically better or required as some Platonic ideal.

I know this will shock you, but I wrote about the history of saving throws.

D&D 5E - A Brief History of Saving Throws, the Original Plot Armor

There has been a recent thread discussing the original (1e, OD&D) saving throws, and I thought it would be helpful to examine the ways in which saving throws (and the conception of saving throws) have changed over time. As a general concept, I would say that the original conception of saving...

www.enworld.org

So looking at the "Canonical Five"-
Paralyzation, Poison, or Death Magic
Petrification or Polymorph
Rod, Staff or Wand
Breath Weapon
Spell


Hmmm. Okay, If I had to simplify it ...
Paralyzation, Poison, Petrification or Polymorph (ALL OF YOUR P NEEDS!)
Rod, Staff, Wand, or Breath Weapon (STUFF GETTING SHOT AT YOU!)
Spell (which should include death magic)


The death magic was always the weirdest one, but it's because it used to be "Poison or death ray."