Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5913808" data-attributes="member: 996">Leomund's Tiny Hut.&nbsp; Not the spell, the column.&nbsp; Alternate initiative system is just one example.In the 80s, alone, I saw many.&nbsp; &nbsp; Maybe you played with very orthodox groups who followed the rules precisely.&nbsp; I've personally never met anyone who played 0D&amp;D or 1e 'straight.'&nbsp; I'm not certain it /can/ be played 'RAW' (it was very clunky if you tried to use all the fiddly bits, and there were definitely some serious 'Murphy's rules' in there) for long before you run into an issue where you just need to add or change rules to keep things functional.&nbsp; This millennium, sure, RAW rules, but in the 20th century, the rules were not held as remotely sacred.&nbsp; I think it might have been regional differences.&nbsp; I'm on the west coast, and in the groups and conventions around the greater SF bay area, that's how things were.&nbsp; Before the internet brought us all together to flame eachother, you could have distinct variations like that... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />With or without the ineffectual balancing mechanisms that have been attempted, magic can easily prove overpowered in classic D&amp;D.&nbsp; Not just magic-users, but magic items, actually.&nbsp; I agree, though, that the problem was less pronounced in AD&amp;D than in 3e.&nbsp; In 3e the imbalances were more systematic, and players could leverage them consistently.&nbsp; In AD&amp;D they were more random or more firmly in the DMs court.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 5913808, member: 996"] Leomund's Tiny Hut. Not the spell, the column. Alternate initiative system is just one example. In the 80s, alone, I saw many. Maybe you played with very orthodox groups who followed the rules precisely. I've personally never met anyone who played 0D&D or 1e 'straight.' I'm not certain it /can/ be played 'RAW' (it was very clunky if you tried to use all the fiddly bits, and there were definitely some serious 'Murphy's rules' in there) for long before you run into an issue where you just need to add or change rules to keep things functional. This millennium, sure, RAW rules, but in the 20th century, the rules were not held as remotely sacred. I think it might have been regional differences. I'm on the west coast, and in the groups and conventions around the greater SF bay area, that's how things were. Before the internet brought us all together to flame eachother, you could have distinct variations like that... ;) With or without the ineffectual balancing mechanisms that have been attempted, magic can easily prove overpowered in classic D&D. Not just magic-users, but magic items, actually. I agree, though, that the problem was less pronounced in AD&D than in 3e. In 3e the imbalances were more systematic, and players could leverage them consistently. In AD&D they were more random or more firmly in the DMs court. [/QUOTE]

Verification