D&D General I'm a Fighter, not a Lover: Why the 1e Fighter was so Awesome

[Voadam]

And they were ridiculous because they weren't integrated into the rest of the game- nothing else, really, referred to psionics in the game with very few exceptions, so they weren't integrated at all.

But every 1e Monster and god entry has those psionics lines. Which are just taking up extra space since there are already monster stat lines for special attacks and defenses where this could come in.

 

[Sacrosanct]

"...just how good the fighter actually was designed."

That's the part that I don't think playing RAW helps determine.

I think it absolutely does, because as you immediately say:

I would say that you're in uncharted waters because people back in the day didn't follow the 1E rules religiously. I'll say again, I never saw anyone try and stick to (for any length of time, like a campaign) the 1E rules as they were written. They tried but quickly deemed many of them flawed.

Which goes to my point:

"We ignore all the rules that favored the fighter, then complain how the fighter sucks." To me, that's disingenuous to then try to complain how the game is not balanced, or the game is to blame for the fighter problems. No, the game isn't at fault, we are for choosing to ignore the rules that favored the fighter.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Fair... and they've been and are dying of old age. The first cohort is in their 70s and 80s. We lost a few last Winter. No more posts. Then months later we get the news. Never met them but it's sad.

My group had no problem using 10 segment rounds, up until the end of 2e, even with individual initiative. The M-U insisted on it, it made sense to us. Race level limits were thing at my table. Weapon vs Armor modifier were important to us.

Speed factor was one step too much for us. Psionics never came up as no one rolled high enough. I vaguely remember devils and demons used them against the party. Grappling? I can't recall.

The current game I'm in I talked about? The DM is in her late 20s. So they still exist and aren't just all old grogs.

 

[Sacrosanct]

But every 1e Monster and god entry has those psionics lines. Which are just taking up extra space since there are already monster stat lines for special attacks and defenses where this could come in.

View attachment 416350

The whole thing was dumb. Psionics were created for the mind flayer as a way to get at players (that's why it's in the MM, along with the few other creatures that have it--appeared first in Dragon with the Mind Flayer). It was only included in the PHB when Tim Kask convinced Gary that it's not right that monsters would have psionics and no way a PC could defend against them.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But every 1e Monster and god entry has those psionics lines. Which are just taking up extra space since there are already monster stat lines for special attacks and defenses where this could come in.

View attachment 416350

We used psionics in 1e, but only rarely because you had to roll high enough. We did try every time. Personally I preferred the 1e psionicist class from Dragon #78 or the 2e psionicist from the Complete Psionics Handbook.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The whole thing was dumb. Psionics were created for the mind flayer as a way to get at players (that's why it's in the MM, along with the few other creatures that have it--appeared first in Dragon with the Mind Flayer). It was only included in the PHB when Tim Kask convinced Gary that it's not right that monsters would have psionics and no way a PC could defend against them.

Says you. I never thought they were dumb, and continue to use psionics in my current games regularly.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Says you. I never thought they were dumb, and continue to use psionics in my current games regularly.

No, I meant how they were handled and how it went down.

Let's create this one monster to get a players!
Now that we did this one monster, let's add this field to every stat block even though it's pretty much NIL for everything
Let's create new mechanics of a crazy system, but put it in the back of the book, and ensure that 95% of PCs would never be able to get it anyway.

 

[fuindordm]

But yeah, following the official rules for psionics?? Not a chance. They were simply not well designed, and I'm well aware that statements that bold are frequently taken as blasphemous, but too bad. It's the truth. No, not one person's truth. The. Truth. The 1E version of the rules for Psionics were trash. Ask around if you don't believe me.

I have used AD&D psionics in serious games, and I like psi in my fantasy, but I won't lift a finger to defend the PH appendix version either.