D&D 1E Giving an AD&D feel to 5e

[The Hierophant]

The only changes I would make would be restrictions on races and classes/subclasses. So only elves and half elves can be Eldritch Knights or Arcane Tricksters etc. For example.

 

[fearsomepirate]

IMO gold for XP and having a reaction table matters more than 99% of that other stuff. Fundamentally changes the flow of the game.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

For me the ADnD feel was delivered by the class kits, and roleplaying and racial restrictions.
I know that this is not what people want today, but back then, having stereotypical magic proof dwarves, righteous good human paladins, true neutral druids and my favoutite: all those distinct bard kits.
Also the different progression for different classes and thus different levels where they shine was another one. Individual xp too. Also magic items were a big part of your class.
Another one was only having a certain amount of weapon proficiencies.

So if you aim for an ADnD feel, start with racial restrictions to each class.
Then add individual xp as a reward for roleplaying and certain things.
A fighter for killing monsters, the rogue for finding gold, wizards for casting useful spells and so on.

Then last but not least, magic items should not have attunement. The rest is actually quite in line with ADnD items.

The removal of stat increases (or feats) is aso importat (although in ADnD we had a houserule for stat increases to low stats) . Since we only give a certain amount of weapon proficiencies, at level 4 and so on you may chose another weapon (or skill) to train in. Similar weapons gain half proficiency to hit. Fighter might specialize in a weapon (+1/+2) if they desire.
A wizard can instead gain a certain number of spells (they are only granted a lesser amount of spells by default and have to roll arcana for it), or chose a kill proficiency.

Maybe you could allow for some of the roleplaying feats (actor or linguist or so without the stat bonus) for other classes.

So thats it. ADnD.

 

[Hussar]

Yeah, 5e seems predicated on the notion that players will have more fun if they hit more often, so I've noticed that hits occur about 2/3rds of the time, where in old school (at least at low levels) you were hitting less than 1/3rd of the time.

I have no doubt that lead to the escalation of hit points in 5e, because of the frequency of landing blows they needed to pad the toughness of creatures and characters - whereas in AD&D lower hit points worked because while you weren't being hit as often, when you did hit (or were hit) it meant something.

This is, of course, just speculation... but it adds up.

Really? In old school, at low levels, the baddies were AC 5-8, by and large, meaning that your base to hit was 15-12. Tack in a +1 or +2 for strength/dex now we're down to about 13-10. Add in weapon vs armor tables, and often you were into single digits for hitting most monsters. I'm not sure where you are getting this 33% hit rate. By higher levels, the attack roll was mostly a gimme when your baddies generally topped out at about AC 2 and the fighter's THACO was 12. Magic weapon, some sort of buff, and yeah, we didn't miss all that often.

You want old school feel? The PC's are mowing down small armies of baddies without too much difficulty. Most of the lethality comes from all those save or die effects. After about 3rd, 4th level? The PC's are pretty much combat gods.

Don't believe me? Take a look at 1e modules. The sheer numbers of baddies in there that the PC's were expected to straight up fight and win.

 

[CubicsRube]

In 6e, you'll start at 2nd level.

Well, technically you unlock the achievement after successfully creating your first character and before you buy your first loot box...

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Good call! I'd add that many classes also have a limited list of weapons from which to choose.

Right!

I knew I forgot something.

I'd also let the rogue sneak attack with any weapon they are proficient with, so longswords, clubs and quarterstaffs would be legit weapons for sneak attacks.

Now I just need to decide if I would leave sneak attack as-is or replace it with a scaling multiplier.

 

[dmhelp]

It’s kinda funny that everyone likes ad&d for different reasons and often for rules that other people skipped.

 

[Lanefan]

Really? In old school, at low levels, the baddies were AC 5-8, by and large, meaning that your base to hit was 15-12. Tack in a +1 or +2 for strength/dex now we're down to about 13-10. Add in weapon vs armor tables, and often you were into single digits for hitting most monsters. I'm not sure where you are getting this 33% hit rate.

I'm running a 1st-level party right now and their to-hit rate as a party isn't exactly stellar. Sure the Fighter isn't bad (though still nowhere near single-digit hits against most things), but the Fighter can't take on all six of the opponents meaning the others have to help out, and their to-hit is worse.

By higher levels, the attack roll was mostly a gimme when your baddies generally topped out at about AC 2 and the fighter's THACO was 12. Magic weapon, some sort of buff, and yeah, we didn't miss all that often.

True, at higher levels the warrior-types really did well, but that's kind of the point.

You want old school feel? The PC's are mowing down small armies of baddies without too much difficulty. Most of the lethality comes from all those save or die effects. After about 3rd, 4th level? The PC's are pretty much combat gods.

Tell that to the 7th-9th level characters I was still managing to kill off now and then via straight melee before covid hit.

Don't believe me? Take a look at 1e modules. The sheer numbers of baddies in there that the PC's were expected to straight up fight and win.

A few at a time.

Recent editions - 4e in particular - seem to expect a party to wade through an adventure in one almost non-stop run. 1e much more expected a sortie-and-retreat approach, where you'd kind of nibble away at the adventure bit by bit until you'd softened it up enough to take it on in full. Face-charging through the front door was pretty much suicide.

So yeah, there's lots of baddies, and they'll kill you dead unless you're smart and patient about how you deal with them.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

I honestly did some rules fiddling to see if I could do the same sort of "thing". My result: It's FAR easier to incorporate some of the 5e stuff into 1e than the other way around. For example, Advantage/Disadvantage and the entirety of the Skill/Ability stuff. The next possibility would be to convert AD&D AC's to 5e's AC "higher is better". Not a huge undertaking, could do most on the fly, but some cases became... "odd". Like the Willo-the-Wisp with an AD&D AC of -8 converting to a 5e AC 28. The reason for these 'outliers' is a creatures "toughness" was a combo of AC and HP...whereas 5e is more of straight HP with AC playing only a minor role except at the extreme ends (re: lower than 10 or higher than about 25). With 5e, they opted to often just keep the AC 'lowish', but up the HP's by a large amount (the "bags of HP's" mentality...for 'but hitting things is fun!' mindset).

Anyway. Yeah. It might be easier to go cannibalize what you like from 5e and then incorporate that into 1e than the other way around.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Bacon Bits]

Any thoughts from people that like 1e and 5e?

I would say take a look at Into the Unknown. It's more B/X focused, but it might be the style of play you're looking for.