I've never played AD&D1

[Gentlegamer]

Research revealed that 4 Players was more the norm. 8 might have been the stated expectation on modules and such, but it was not the actual norm/average around the kitchen table.

You mean the "research" conducted in the late 90s. Go back 20 years to when the AD&D rules were published and I think the expectation fits.

 

[Desdichado]

Heh. "4 players is more the norm". Not doubting current wisdom but Back In The Day(TM), Gary would regularly host - at his ome game - 20+ players at one end of the table, with Rob Kuntz DMing another group of ten to fifteen at the other end.

So? Gary wasn't "the norm" he was the game's designer.

 

[Mark Hope]

Yeah, our average group size was 7 or 8. Sometimes we had small groups, and sometimes as large as 12 (although that was quite awful and I'd never do it again). My 3e groups have all been 5 players, by comparison.

 

[thedungeondelver]

14 in my group.

heck, i don't ever remember a convention game with 4 as the number. the smallest i remember at an event was 6.

I typically draw 10-12 with my AD&D games (leaving 3e games in the dust! ), and my D&D game drew fourteen. I had to roll up four additonal characters on the spot! Fortunately as it is the 1974 rules it was actually pretty simple. 3d6, make 'em all 3rd level fighting-men with plate mail and swords et voila!

 

[Henry]

That's quite nice!

Where do you get the maximum of 3 segments of surprise?

Mainly, from the chart in the DMG for surprise, but you are correct: it could go higher. I think I'll leave it as-is for the Gameday, because (1) 3 segments is enough surprise, and (2) I've already printed the sheets.

 

[thedungeondelver]

So? Gary wasn't "the norm" he was the game's designer.

What's your point? I think I already adequately qualified the statement. :\

 

[diaglo]

I typically draw 10-12 with my AD&D games (leaving 3e games in the dust! ), and my D&D game drew fourteen. I had to roll up four additonal characters on the spot! Fortunately as it is the 1974 rules it was actually pretty simple. 3d6, make 'em all 3rd level fighting-men with plate mail and swords et voila!

wt(heck)

1st lvl mang. you never, ever, ever start PCs out higher than lvl 1 if you are a real referee.

 

[mearls]

How did AD&D1 convention/tournament games handle all these rules? Did such official games use *all* the AD&D1 rules? How long did ‘full-rules’ AD&D1 combat take?

I think tournaments took some liberties with the rules. I'm running a 3e version of Against the Giants at work, and one of my players (web guru Bart Carroll) found an article in an old issue of Dragon that recapped the AGTG tournament. Judging from the article, DMs played fast and loose with the rules. Deciding what happened was as much a judgment call as a rules issue.

This was a major strength of 1e. Some gamers might look back and, compared to the more comprehensive 3e, see all the holes and rules that didn't make sense, but in a weird way that helped gaming thrive. IMNSHO, AD&D forced DMs to improvise, create house rules, and find their own level of fun with the rules. Essentially, every group played the game they wanted because they designed the game themselves.

In comparison, 3e is a good place for a gamer to get started. All the rules are there if you look hard enough. The drawback I see is that, for many people, the system is too interconnected, and connected in ways that aren't obvious, for them to feel comfortable modifying things. That's a pity, because half the fun of running a campaign is making house rules, creating monsters and magic items, and building a really unique experience.

 

[Gentlegamer]

We usually had 5-6 PCs plus various henchmen and hirelings.

 

[thedungeondelver]

wt(heck)

1st lvl mang. you never, ever, ever start PCs out higher than lvl 1 if you are a real referee.

Bah. It was a convention, a one-off. All other times, heck yeah. The guy who plays a cleric in the current AD&D game (which started as a D&D game) went through six clerics before the current one!