Let's talk about the AD&D 1e Dungeon Master's Guide

Sebastian Francis

First Post
I'm currently reading through it, more for interest's sake than anything else. I owned it back in 1980 when I was 10 years old, but I never really read it. I've heard it described both as "awkward, verbose, and confusing" and "brilliant, inspired, and poetic." :confused:

AT TIMES PERSONABLE:

"For those of you who haven't really thought about it, the so-called planes are your ticket to creativity, and I mean that with a capital C!" (57)

AT TIMES WORDY:

"If you have plenty of time and ideas, you should design a continent (or a large portion thereof) which perfectly meshes with your initial setting. If this is not possible, obtain one of the commercially available milieux, and place the starting point of your campaign somewhere within this already created world. At the risk of being accused of self-serving, I will mention parenthetically that my own WORLD OF GREYHAWK (published by TSR), was specifically designed to allow for insertion of such beginning milieux, variety being great and history and organization left purposely sketchy to make interfacing a simple matter." (47)

AT TIMES BRILLIANT (THOUGH STILL WORDY):

"All magic and cleric spells are similar in that the word sounds, when combined into whatever patterns are applicable, are charged with energy from the Positive or Negative Material Plane. . . . The triggering action draws power from some plane of the multiverse. Whether the spell is an abjuration, conjuration, alteration, enchantment, or whatever, there is a flow of energy--first from the spell caster, then from some plane to the area magicked or enspelled by the caster. The energy flow is not from the caster *per se*, it is from the utterance of the sounds, each of which is charged with energy which is loosed when the proper formula and/or ritual is completed with their utterance. This power then taps the desired plane (whether or not the spell user has any idea of what or where it is) to cause the spell to function." (40)


SO, what do you think? Is the 1e DMG brilliant? Awkward? Overrated? Underappreciated? Inspired? All of the above? None of the above? Is there any good quality it has that our present 3.5 DMG lacks?

Discuss.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I bought the DMG when it came out (I don't remember if it was 1978, 1979, or 1980...). It fired my imagination! But I'm afraid we've moved on.

It's kind of funny, but a while back I realized I had not read the 3.5 (or 3.0 for that matter) DMG. It is a great book! If you're like me and don't refer to it all the time, sit down and give it a read. It has lots and lots of stats for traps, npcs, and ideas aplenty. The Condition summary in the back is extremely handy.

:cool:
 

It's brilliant. It's a cohesive, articulate presentation of one particular way of running AD&D: a way that's a legitimate part of the traditions of wargaming and literary sword and sorcery, a way that attracted players to the Lake Geneva campaign in the scores. It's a labour of love far away from the utilitarian RPG books of today. It's a book of extraordinary plenitude that you can own for decades and still find new ideas and nuances in.

And it is *not* wordy. The passages quoted could not have obtained their whole effect with fewer words. On the contrary, Gary's writing is extremely dense, and the DMG contains the inspiration for millions of campaigns.

It is, in Gary's own vocabulary, a nonesuch, with few points of comparison to any other book. It can be awkward and confusing until you get into its vibe.
But I'm afraid we've moved on.
I can't imagine what this means. Have we moved on from novels published in 1979? We're talking imaginative work, not computer operating systems.
 

I miss the cartoons. I always wanted a +3 backscratcher.

It was great that it had the stats for all the monsters in the mm.

I liked the charts for random stuff at the end.

I never got the 2e DMG, just kept using the 1e one, I just copied the 2e xp chart and individual rewards section.

Now I use the srd for magic item descriptions.
 

Faraer said:
Have we moved on from novels published in 1979? We're talking imaginative work, not computer operating systems.

Exactly. But this belief--that more recent RPGs are more "advanced" or "highly evolved" than those of the 70's/early 80's--seems prominent among many gamers. Probably because so many gamers are interested in computers and thus choose to apply computer metaphors to others facets of life.
 
Last edited:

That City of Brass Cover is my favorite.
Even though I play 3.5E just picking up that DMG makes me smile.
I used to read it all the time to just read it.
I never thought it was to wordy at the time.
I loved the cartoons and it was chock full of charts and tables.
Even though I love the newest DMG I find that I just don't sit down to read it like I did the older version.
 



Being called a Fool usually does it for me :D

Besides, while I was laughing the whole time, I could easily see these people getting all red faced about an "attack" on their precious 1st Editon DMG (even though it was just an opinion, which I presented with civility).

This is my 25th year of gaming, I've been in it since the boxed set (overall blue) with the fighter, wizard, and red dragon on the cover. My first module was Keep on the Borderlands. And I don't miss 1st edtion whatsoever, except perhaps gamers were more tolerant and polite back then.

And, by the way, my "nerd" job sure does allow me to buy a lot of cool gaming material. :lol:

The_Gneech said:
How did we get from the DMG to being nasty? :uhoh:

-TG :cool:
 


Remove ads

Top