Is the AD&D 1E Revival here to stay?

[Hussar]

Oh, I totally agree with that. I truly think that what you guys have done with OSRIC is a fantastic thing. But, from my personal view, I wouldn't play AD&D ever again. I do not have fond memories of the game particularly. My nostalgia factor is extremely low and, frankly, there isn't a chance I'd go back to that.

On the idea of whether the revival is here to stay or not, I truly hope that it is. The more people playing D&D, whatever edition, the better.

 

[tx7321]

Hussar: "And there's the problem right there. What you decide can be done in real life and what I decide can be done in real life can be entirely different. Thus, the players are pretty much beholden to whatever the DM decides is reasonable. Having had far too many rows in game over exactly this sort of thing, I, for one, am very, very happy to see that taken out of the hands of the DM."

Yet in "real life" you don't really know if something will work or not, but you can take a calculated guess. The problem with any game is when it gets too predictable, when you can calculate your odds too closely (even exactly). At least thats when I bore of it.

Anyhow, 1E is all about "DM is God". The players are ants moving around in the DMs ant farm. If a DM chooses to change his opinion about whats reasonable in the middle of a game, then so be it. Don't like it don't play. And from your response I guess you probably don't. What you see as a "problem" I see as 1Es greatest strength.


Melan, couldn't you do the same thing with 1E if you really wanted to? It'd probably have to be color coded though given the number of classes and progressions. Anyhow, I always liked the charts as DM. Anything that seems to complicate the game for the players (where they feel left in the dark) is a good thing...helps with immersion (as long as its not really complicated for the DM). Its good enough to know that when I play a fighter I have a better chance of hitting something then a thief or MU. It might require you carry a purse though to carry your DMG, as it won't fit in your wallet.

Anyhow, since when is "simpler" and "faster" considered better in a game?

 

[Maggan]

OD&D, Classic D&D and OAD&D back in print with POD would complement 3E not compete with it. This is an easily recognizable fact, to assert otherwise is quite simply either ignorant of the historical facts or deliberately dishonest. If this offends anyone then I offer my sincere apology that the truth has hurt you, but it nevertheless does not change the truth that WotC/Hasbro has forever had this lame assertion that OD&D/OAD&D would compete with their current products and dilute the market; however, there is zero evidence that this is the case.

Hmmmmm ... so having two virtually identical products using virtually the same trademark compete against each other would in your opinion not be a problem for WotC?

It is my opinion, and I don't feel particularily ignorant of historical facts or especially dishonest, that it would be a bad idea for WotC to bring out OD&D and AD&D again, mostly because of the risk of confusing the marketplace (consumers and distributors), thereby running the risk of diluting the brand value.

I have a suspicion that someone will assert that AD&D and D&D most certainly are not virtually identical products, but from a marketing perspective they are. It works for D&D Minis, because that is easily recognisable as an entity of its own. It works with D&D Chess for the same reason. I don't think it would work with D&D and AD&D.

My memories of the confusion I experienced over the difference between Basic D&D and AD&D makes me cringe. Sure, hard core gamers will tell them apart. But hard core gamers can get their fix without WotC having to reprint the stuff.

So from where I look at it, it's really not an easily recognisable fact that having parallel lines of the D&D roleplaying game would benefit WotC.

/M

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

So from where I look at it, it's really not an easily recognisable fact that having parallel lines of the D&D roleplaying game would benefit WotC.

You don't think WOTC would benefit from a return to the old TSR values?

I ask because I don't see WOTC selling 75,000 copies of their modules.

 

[Maggan]

You don't think WOTC would benefit from a return to the old TSR values?

I ask because I don't see WOTC selling 75,000 copies of their modules.

That was then, this is now. IMO it would be immensly stupid of WotC to act as if it was 1985 again.

The marketplace has changed. Do you think WotC would sell 75,000 copies of an AD&D module today, if it was published parallel to the 3e products?

If so, I've got to know who supplies your crystal balls, cause I'm getting myself one of them!

/M

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

That was then, this is now. IMO it would be immensly stupid of WotC to act as if it was 1985 again.

That's certainly true; D&D was in decline at that point. The high point for sales was probably 1980-82.

There's a lot to discuss with this, but I don't want to threadjack.

 

[Maggan]

That's certainly true; D&D was in decline at that point. The high point for sales was probably 1980-82.

Fair enough. I started playng D&D in 1984. Here in Sweden the peak of roleplaying games came in 1985 to 1987. In a country of 8 million, the dominant rpg sold over one hundred thousand copies of the core rules. Most of them in that span.

It was a crazy time for pen and paper roleplaying games. A time we won't see again in a hurry.

/M

 

[Aaron L]

Anyhow, 1E is all about "DM is God". The players are ants moving around in the DMs ant farm. If a DM chooses to change his opinion about whats reasonable in the middle of a game, then so be it. Don't like it don't play.

Ugh. I'm sorry, but that doesn't even remotely resemble the 1E we played. I don't know, maybe it was because just about everyone in our group is a also a DM at one time or another and know that DMs aren't infallible, and none of us were satisfied to just rely on the arbitrary whims of one person to decide what is possible in the game and allow him to totally change his mind during the course of the it ("yeah, you could do that before, but I've decided I don't want to let you do it anymore.")

Of course there's still an element of that in any roleplying game with a referee, but the "DM is god and the players are ants" analogy leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. I'm not playing D&D to be totally subject to the DMs whims.

If you're going to play like that, why even bothering to have rules? Just ask the DM if you can do something and have him decide the outcome. It would be little more than an interactive story with the DM as storyteller, but if everything is left totally up to DM fiat then thats what it is anyway. I want some structure and some assurance that what is supposed to happen will happen without the DM just deciding that he doesn't want it to.

 

[RFisher]

[...] it nevertheless does not change the truth that WotC/Hasbro has forever had this lame assertion that OD&D/OAD&D would compete with their current products and dilute the market; however, there is zero evidence that this is the case.

Can you cite a source of this WotC/Hasbro assertion? (Not that I'm doubting you, I'd just curious about the source.)

In truth, WotC is selling oAD&D & classic D&D. (& even Mythus!) They may be low quality PDFs, but they are selling them. (It's unfortunate that oD&D--except for the supplements--isn't available, though.)

There's also the possibility that the WotC/Kenzer agreement puts some limits on what WotC can do in support of the older editions.

Anyhow, since when is "simpler" and "faster" considered better in a game?

For me, since I got married & had two kids.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Fair enough. I started playng D&D in 1984. Here in Sweden the peak of roleplaying games came in 1985 to 1987. In a country of 8 million, the dominant rpg sold over one hundred thousand copies of the core rules. Most of them in that span.

It was a crazy time for pen and paper roleplaying games. A time we won't see again in a hurry.

/M

Am I right in thinking D&D was never translated into Swedish?

If so, that seems a bit discourteous to me. Although every Swedish person I've ever met has spoken better English than I do, there's no justification for assuming you'll speak it! A market of 100,000 paying customers merits some concessions to their language.

100,000 rules copies in Sweden alone is an amazing statistic. I had no idea that the game was so popular over there.