Has anyone went back to 1E AD&D from 3E?

[Ron]

A prediction:

AoO is the "new THACO".

Although I doubt whether 4th ed will ever be created, you'll have people laughing at what an overcomplicated mess those rules were.

Discuss.

I agree with you. I don't think that AoO are actually overcomplicated but rather difficult to implement. They cry for the use of miniatures or counters over a squared area. I hate that! I always disliked the use of minis as I regard RPG as verbal game. Many rules in D&D3 appears to be optmized towards miniature playing and that's my main complain about this edition.

 

[green slime]

It is not the game that matters but the people surrounding you whilst playing it.

I second that sentiment. I don't give a rat's rear rectum for the rules. It's the people you game with that matter.

 

[Numion]

Until 3E I felt and still feel that it was the possibly the worst or close to the worst RPG on the market. In fact I only bothered to look at 3E in order to find arguments to debate that it was still the pathetic excuse for an RPG that it had always been.

My thoughts exactly. The hatred of aD&D was so deep in my group that they were really not happy when I said we'd try 3e. Now we have more fun playing than ever before. And my friends are really happy with it too.

(Yes, I forced my group into switching to 3e. Being the only DM in the group is nice sometimes...)

 

[Numion]

I second that sentiment. I don't give a rat's rear rectum for the rules. It's the people you game with that matter.

Wrong.

The game system affects the way people play. Or would you have fun playing Synnibar or Fatal, even when playing with your normal group?

 

[Psion]

The game system affects the way people play. Or would you have fun playing Synnibar or Fatal, even when playing with your normal group?

Touche!

That said, I cannot believe you mentioned the "F"-word. Now people are going to ask what it is.

To all concerned: You do not want to know.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I never found the rules to 1E AD&D to be a problem. We didn't use the rules on weapons vs varying types of armor, or weapon speed, or demi-human level limits. Most of the players were still humans though. Now when I run a combat I have to factor in a ton of bull, is he flanking, is he going to give an AoO with this move, don't forget to remember all the charge modifiers, etc. Some things are easier, but some seem more cumbersome. After thinking about it I'd wager once we are done with RttTOEE we will be familiar enough with the rules to run things faster, but as of now combats take forever.

 

[Rashak Mani]

Well 1st or 3rd Edition at least their is a consensus that 2nd edition was the worse !

A friend wanted to play 2nd Edition again because he has some difficulties with the 3rd ed... I just said no thank you... it takes ages to make a character and the rules just dont feel right now.

As for 1st Edition... they were good rules and any defects could be house ruled... but 3rd Edition is better and can be house ruled too... 3rd Edtion just feels right. You do have to put some time and effort in the beggining... just like with any game you start from scratch... but I think it is worthwhile... some rules stink but all games have them.

(hate the price of scribing scrolls into spellbook.... )

 

[Storm Raven]

I never found the rules to 1E AD&D to be a problem. We didn't use the rules on weapons vs varying types of armor, or weapon speed, or demi-human level limits.

I love this sort of defense of 1e/2e.

"1e (or 2e) was great! If you just ignored weapon vs. armor type modifiers, weapon speed, demihuman level limits, added house rules allowing for a skill system and removing the restrictions on what races could be what classes, and monkeyed around with a couple dozen other things it was a great game!"

Apparently 1e/2e was a better game because, if you ignored half the rules and added a bunch of house rule patches, the game worked okay.

Personal anecdote. The group of gamers I played with quit playing 2e in the early nineties, moving on to various other games (GURPS, Rolemaster, Amber and so on). In about '96 I thought I would gather my gamer friends together and we would go back and try an AD&D campaign again, since we had some good memories of the game and figured since we had all played 1e/2e from at least 1982 through 1992 (some of us, including myself, having gotten our D&D start earlier than that) we should have no trouble with the rules.

It was a mess. The layoff combined with exposure to more systemized games had atrophied our skills with the system to the point where we didn't have any fun. Trying to keep track of all of the individual mechanics and the patchwork quilt of piled on rules was such a headache that the campaign only lasted three sessions before we chucked the game and went back to playing a much easier to work with game: like GURPS. (Note, I said GURPS is simpler to work with than 1e/2e. I meant it too).

When 3e came out, I got together with some gamers and decided to give it a try, since I was generally impressed with the upgrades to the rules that made them more coherent and flexible. We picked the mechanics up in a matter of hours. Compared to the failed attempt at a 1e/2e game, the 3e game flowed easily, people had no trouble coming up with exactly the caharcters they wanted to play with no house ruling or modifications needed. This is one of the primary experiences that convinced me that 3e is actually an easier to work with game than 1e/2e ever was.

 

[Agamon]

Go back to 1E? Hey, what a great idea!

Now, let me just find a very hard place for me to fall on my head...

 

[Wild Karrde]

I'm with what appears to be the general consensus on this board. I'd rather have my teeth systematically yanked out one by one with no anesthesia then to go back to 1e. I will agree it was better than 2e, but after 3e...no way baby.