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

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Sometimes It takes bricks and mortor activity to revive or launch something. But who'd organize that (as Grodog was suggesting). An online Con could be advertised with flyers at gaming stores nationwide. This would help online vendors as well as the host forum.

I could see this being profitable for PPP, ER, GG, and the other small Indys supporting OSRIC and 1E. Would anyone volunteer to organize something like this (Papers and Paychecks, Grodog maybe)?

I'm afraid I lack the technical skills to organise an online con, sorry. I'd very happily participate in one.

 

[diaglo]

Crazy Igors? Now that's a name I haven't heard in a while. Is he still doing business?

Yes, on eBay mostly, though Crazy Egor's website has been offline for some time IIRC.

and if my mind wasn't playing tricks on me he was at Gen Con Indy this year too.

 

[diaglo]

Diaglo, why don't you do it yourself? I'd be interested if you made a pdf supplement. The existence of Osric shows how it is possible without getting sued. Or you can just stay "rules absent" and do something that works with many versions of rules.

i submitted my version of it for the WotC setting search.

i don't think they took me seriously.

 

[Ant]

We want rules that don't get in the way of the role-playing and put the fun back into the game.

I've never really understood this statement.

About an hour ago I finished playing in a D&D 3.5 game. We used the 3.5 rules extensively -- we referenced the players handbook, we had variant classes, used attacks of opportunity, used combat modifiers, cast spells, used magic items, had an animal companion, did grappling, took into account move equivalent actions and standard actions, players readied attacks and used Knowledge checks. We used minis and battlemaps and Dungeon Tiles. We only played for 3 hours but explored a sizable number of areas, had four seperate combats, used clever (?) tactics to defeat the monsters, blindly jumped down holes, hobnobbed with the locals, used Bluff and Sense Motive checks, enjoyed interparty conflict and laughed as the barbarian dropped to an owlbear again.

At the end everyone was grinning like idiots. We'd had a blast. The non-d20 fan was grinning the most. We stood outside talking about the game we'd just had and I can't even remember the last time we did that. And not once did anyone comment about the game system being used ...

Back on topic I sincerely hope that the revival, such as it is, stays and grows. I love AD&D despite itself which is exactly how I feel about Basic and 2.0 ... and 3.5.

Ant

ps Greywolf, I'm greatly impressed with Microlite d20 and I'm encouraging a friend who recently dropped d20 Modern to give it a go. Thanks for all of your effort!

 

[Umbran]

In all seriousness how do you keep getting away with such statements?

If you have questions about moderation, please e-mail one of the moderators, rather than risk derailing threads with them. Our e-mail addresses are available in a thread stickied to the top of the Meta forum

 

[RFisher]

So, I wonder how to push this wagon up the hill to the top so it can role on down the other side. Seriously, how do you get New Schoolers to even try AD&D (even though everyone has a copy of OSRIC by now, few really read it or run it).

There was a great post by...if I recall correctly...Stormcrow on Dragonsfoot on this subject once. Basically it boiled down to: Find a FLGS. Find out what evenings they host role-playing. Go there & run AD&D. If you have no takers, keep coming back until you do. Run the best sessions you are able & show people what's great about AD&D.

Do the same at any cons that are close enough.

If you want to see more Osric & C&C products, buy what's available. (As long as it's good. I reject the idea that consumers buying bad products will encourage companies to create better products.)

 

[Will]

I find that in comparisons between editions, the 'rule complexity' issue often confuses things.

3.x has more rules than earlier editions (though it can be argued how much).

Thing is, liking a certain amount of rules doesn't necessarily mean that a given edition is 'best' for you. Personally, I found the rules in pre-3rd edition not to my taste.

So I am interested in the folks who are taking a different direction; starting with third edition and simplifying, sometimes with an eye on what previous editions had.

Is there a revival? I don't know, but I think there is a general blossoming of experimentation sparked by the OGL and D20, and spreading through the various permutations of D&D and related games.

 

[Maggan]

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

First, let me state that the following is in no way intended to be read as me forcing my truth at anyone. This is what I think is the current situation, nothing more, nothing less. To start with I don't think there is a simple yes/no answer to the question. Looking at the situation I don't think there is more of a revival today, than say six months ago, or a year ago. At the same time, I don't think there is less of a revival either.

At the moment, there is much talk about OSRIC being the herald of the AD&D 1E goodness,. But before that, C&C was the herald of the change back to the basics of the early D&D/AD&D. And before that Hackmaster was that herald (and a herald that hewed very closely to AD&D, it being for most intent and purposes, AD&D in another suit of armor). So OSRIC is picking up a gauntlet that is passed from other initiatives, that have more or less been rejected as the vehicle for a "new but old" AD&D feeling. C&C has found it's own niche, and Hackmaster has floundered for reasons I'm not really sure of. To me, this indicates that OSRIC is the current focus for a latent wish for a "modern" rule set for the AD&D experience. Hence, no "revival", but rather a continued interest that has found another focal point. Which is due to Papers&Paychecks sterling work and vision.

So will this last? Yes and no.

I suspect that OSRIC will be met with interest and excitement for a while. Right now, before many people have had a hard look at the rules, it still carries with it the promise of delivering the AD&D experience of old. A promise that will be harder and harder to fulfill, as more people download the rules and start using them. Because the experiences of AD&D is very much different from group to group. When we're still talking about a vague "promise of AD&D", everyone can agree that OSRIC is a good thing.

But when we as a community start to get down to the nitty gritty, the rules, we will probably want to change OSRIC to fit our needs and tastes. And maybe some realise that that good old feeling wasn't really that much dependant on rules, but more a question of style. So the unified vision in the community of OSRIC will be diluted, and it will not continue to be the common solution for that "new but old" AD&D feeling. And the community will start looking for the next herald of the good old AD&D feeling.

Having the strong vision of Papers&Paychecks and several commercial publishers to back him up could negate that. And that vision is in my opinion more important than the rules themselves. So, is the revival here to stay? Well, the wish for an old but new AD&D never went away and there are people constantly looking for something/someone to carry the torch forward. So the interest will stay. I'm just not sure the rules that carry the banner of AD&D will have the same staying power.

/M

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I find that in comparisons between editions, the 'rule complexity' issue often confuses things.

3.x has more rules than earlier editions (though it can be argued how much).

Thing is, liking a certain amount of rules doesn't necessarily mean that a given edition is 'best' for you. Personally, I found the rules in pre-3rd edition not to my taste.

So I am interested in the folks who are taking a different direction; starting with third edition and simplifying, sometimes with an eye on what previous editions had.

Is there a revival? I don't know, but I think there is a general blossoming of experimentation sparked by the OGL and D20, and spreading through the various permutations of D&D and related games.

I did that and I ended up with something similar to C&C, so I just switched to that.

 

[Greg K]

All those "Complete...." books, etc have made us hit saturation point.

My problem isn't the publication of "Complete" books. I actually liked the majority of the 2e Complete Books despite the horrid mechanics and unbalance of some kits (problems that I associate primarily with the ununified mechanics of ADND). No, my problem with the current edition Complete Books is, despite the overall excellent core mechanics of the current edition, the majority of WOTC's content in those books (and the majority of the WOTC generic DND line) is, imo, just terrible.

As for an alternative to the current edition of DND, I am looking at True20 or perhaps going back to Rolemaster.