If you could have created D&D before Gygax..

[S'mon]

I wouldn't have a Cleric class (sorcerers would be able to heal), and I'd have left out or toned down the area-effect Artillery spells; magic would be more personal, the feel/tone would be more like 1st ed Warhammer or Fighting Fantasy. Probably give a level bonus to AC, and reduce hit point gain, something like Dragon Warriors. I would keep the combat & loot focus and the thrill of dungeon-delving and 'levelling up'. I'd use a lot of 3e's streamlined mechanics, eg "high roll is better" and Will/Ref/Fort saves rather than Saves vs Spells/Rods/Breath etc.

 

[Gez]

• I'd keep the vancian magic, but for wizards only. Clerics would have spontaneous spellcasting (à la d20 Sorcerer) from a list limited by their domain/sphere/whatever (around 4 spell known per spell level), druids would have a skill-check-based spellcasting (with bonus when they're in special places, such as ley lines and nexii), and psionics would use power points.
  The spells, on the other hand, once cast, would all work the same way, to avoid making things too complicated. Four different methods of spellcasting, conveying nearly all the flavours of spellcasting one may like (so people who can't stand Vancian spellcasting would just remove wizards, or house-rule it to use one of the other spellcasting methods laid about).
• Then, in Unearthed Arcana, I'd introduce a few classes that cross the line -- spontaneous wizard, power-point cleric, whatever. Bards, paladins, rangers, etc. would be there as well.
• No half-blood race. No half-elf, no half-orc, no half-ogre, no half-whatever.
• Outside of the four spellcasting classes, the choice would be more limited than it is now. Fighter (all about combat), Rogue (all about sneaking), Noble (all about diplomacy), and Sage (all about knowing stuff).
• Easy multiclassing. Want to do a ranger? A big bit of Fighter, a tiny bit of Sage (for wilderness lore), and a bit of druid.
• No class feature, but a feat (to use the d20 term) at each level. All class features would thus become feats, most of them having for prerequisite a minimum level in one of the base classes.
• And finally, racial paragon classes so you can just be an elf or a dwarf. They would in fact be hybrid classes: the dwarf would be fighter/sage, the elf fighter/wizard, the gnome druid/sage, the halfling fighter/rogue, and the human would have two, knight (fighter/noble) and templar (fighter/cleric). Each of them would count as being 3/4 of their level in each of their constituent classes for purpose of feat selection.
• Five saves: defense (AC), fortitude, reflex, will, and magic resistance. They would be the target number of agressions -- attacks would have to beat defense, poisons and disease to beat fortitude, traps to beat reflex, sirine songs to beat will, and spells to beat magic resistance. When an agression belongs to two or more categories (like a mind-affecting spell), it would have to beat the highest.
  It would offer some flexibility. For example, if you attempt to trip an enemy, or deliver a touch attack, you'll have to beat his reflex save rather than his defense save.
• And attacks, that is, reverse saves. BAB against defense, caster level against magic resistance, quickness against reflex, persuasion against will... I don't see much what would be the reverse Fortitude, I guess only monsters with abilities like poison would ever use it...
• For the bestiary, "level" would be used instead of "hit dice". So that 30 years later, in d20, we wouldn't have to juggle with level, CR, HD, LA, and ECL. Monsters with a lot of special capacities would have a lot of HD, and monsters with few HD would have few or no special capacities.

Anyway, I'm just tossing ideas there. I haven't exactly worked for several weeks on "My Own D&D For If I Ever Create a Time Machine."

 

[jester47]

After thinking about it, if it was not time travel oriented (that is I am more contemporary to the time of creation than I am now) I probably would have made Ars Magica. Considering that I only recently became aware of Moorcock, Vance, and Leiber in my later life, it would have been based on Arthurian romance, Tolkeins work, Lewis's work, and myth and legend. Thus you would probably have the races, wizards and warriors and thats about it. The magic system would have been very much like the ars magica one.

Today I would only do it if I could take Jon Tweet with me. Mainly cause he could argue for AC as it is now and do away with lots of charts.

Aaron.

 

[Aethelstan]

The inclusion of psionics in 1st ed. always seemed rather odd to me. The rules were very quirky and did not seem to fit at all into the medieval/Tolkeinese themes and flavor of D&D. What is an abillity like "Molecular Manipulation" doing in a game with knights and dragons?
"Ego Whip vs. Mind Blank?" Great stuff for Sci-fi but really hopelessly out of place in a world like Greyhawk

 

[Henry]

I think the question is skewed even further than THAT.

Remember one tenet of the creation of D&D: Gary and the other authors of the beginning did not necessarily "choose a set of rules" to put into the game, the way we do in the present day. Instead, they GOT their rules from interpreting what they read in novels of the present era. The spell system was interpreted from the writings of Jack Vance, when Gary saw and liked the idea of spells being codified as such, where they were so "strong" and almost leaped off the page that a person could only "know" a few at one time. Alternately, he could have gone with a more Conan-esque interpretation, where dark-hearted people had to petition demons for their powers and secret knowledges. Casters would be able to cast more, but likely their powers would grow as they learned to summon more powerful demonic entities by level. (Now imagine how well THAT would have gone off with the parents of the 1980s!!!)

The parts where they DID lift rules were either from games he had previously created, a la armor class from a wargame (what was it? Run out the Guns?) or from usual conventions of the time (high roll wins initiative?). But things like the races and their characteristics were gleaned from novels of the day or from folk legends in print.

So the more interesting question to me would be, "what would YOU have used as sources of inspiration if you had been in Gary's position in the 1970's? I doubt that many of us could answer, because most of the fiction later players best remember is DERIVED from D&D or sources influenced by D&D. It would have to have been published prior to 1974 in order for it to be totally free of Gary's and other's influences.

 

[Slobber Monster]

Yes Slobber, I've fired a shotgun and a lot of other firearms as well. I was trying to evoke an image of something powerful that could hurt you if not handled properly. I think that describes a shotgun rather well.

Well I think it's a poor metaphor in that it supports my side of the argument better than it does yours. A shotgun is certainly dangerous to the person it's pointed at. The odds of someone who is not totally incompetent hurting themselves with it are pretty slim. Compare to a Wand of Acid Arrow, for example. An arcane caster who is trained and practiced in its use can use it as reliably as I can a shotgun. Someone who is merely a dabbler (i.e. Use Magic Device skill) won't have such consistant results.

I agree that not all legendary account of magic portray magic as dangerous. My issue with D&D magic is that its virtually zero risk. More often that not in legendary and fantasy literature, there is a price to pay for practicing magic: Wizards must form pacts with Gods or demons in exchange for power. Rare or forbidden items are needed to cast a spell (human blood, hair of the dog that bit you, etc.). Arcane knowledge may drive the wizard mad. Spells may have unforeseen or even disasterous conseqences (think of poor Mickey Mouse in the "Sorcerer's Apprentice"). D&D magic does not cost anything (besides time and gold), always works in a consistant matter and never harms the caster (Fireball "friendly fire" incidents don't count). In short D&D magic is safe. In all the accounts of magic I've ever
come across, it is seldom, if ever, portrayed as safe.

Except that these dangers have always been present in the rules in various forms: twisted wishes, missed teleports, failed system shock rolls, contact other planes insanity, aging from haste, bargaining with demons, cursed magic items, etc. Not every spell has such a factor, and maybe more should, but it is present in the game. The problem from a game perspective of making magic too capricious is that it is not always fun for the typical player. People want to be able to use their neato powers in game, so if there's too much of a cost associated with them they're often just not worth the trouble.

 

[TerraDave]

So the more interesting question to me would be, "what would YOU have used as sources of inspiration if you had been in Gary's position in the 1970's? I doubt that many of us could answer, because most of the fiction later players best remember is DERIVED from D&D or sources influenced by D&D. It would have to have been published prior to 1974 in order for it to be totally free of Gary's and other's influences.

That is the more interesting question (though I and many others could answer it, and think at least one or two posters in this thread already have).

For OD&D, I think they where dead on, with a great combination of pulp/swords and sorcery, tolkien, myth and legend, and historical influances. The rules where light and loose, which wasn't all bad (though I was never convienced by outdoor survival--which I actually did play once).

The spirit stayed good, but the mechanics became too: baroque, rigid, and arbitrary, requiring a lot of DM judgment and house ruling (often which rules to ignore) while still not dealing with a lot of potential in game issues. So I wish that the first three hardbacks would have been influanced by a desire for clarity above the desire for a proper "simulation": more Diplomacy, less Squad Leader

 

[Virel]

Four core books?

Yes, as I understand EGG's vision for "2nd" edition, it would have been a clean up of 1st.

PHB would have been expanded to include the player matierals in UA, skill stuff from DSG & WSG, maybe the DMG's age, weight & height tables or revised ones and such. The bard from 1st ed would have been fixed. A few classes added. Psionics fixed or dropped etc that sort of thing.

DMG revised and updated with the material from UA and probably more advise etc.

MM - The MM, FF, MM2 and creatures from the modules would be sorted thru and the best put in the new MM. Stupid creatures like the flump from FF would be dropped etc. A few new creature would probably be added.

LL - Legends & Lore/Deities & Demigods type book, which would cover the deities in more details, probably include the setting specific deities etc. Maybe more on clerical requirements for specific ones etc.

If anyone is interested I can probably find more details as someone was nice enough to post them on dragonsfoot, the OOP D&D site.

Being a wargamer from back in the 70's, I like the wargamer roots of the early editions, I also enjoy playing the 3e. I'm finally able to get a Monk above 7th level without having to fight another monk at each level beyond! In 1st you had to fight for the level and if you lost you lost the level and were dropped way down in experience.

When I think of a 70's vintage RPG, with that EGG had to look at, I think it would end up looking like Star Trek the RPG, if I had done it.

 

[Gez]

After thinking about it, if it was not time travel oriented (that is I am more contemporary to the time of creation than I am now) I probably would have made Ars Magica.

If it wasn't time-travel-oriented, I wouldn't have done anything in time, I think, what with being born in 1979...

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I'd go back and change the alignment descriptor "Law" to "Order."

Then everyone who goes on and on about "legality" being a prime determiner of the lawful alignment would be forced to shut the heck up! Argh!