• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Making a Character in Every Edition of D&D, Part One: 1974

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnjA4D0Z4pM

I thought this would be a short video, doesn't take that long to make a dude in OD&D, but I became fascinated with all the weirdness in this game, and ended up doing a bunch of research, "why is this like this?"

Watch in HD otherwise you won't be able to read along. :D

Really cool and hugely fun to watch; as someone who could have played the original (I'm old enough) but didn't come to D&D until 4e, this was really interesting to watch.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Matt, this is really great. I hope you continue in this vein, and that [MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION] archives these links here, because the videos are an outstanding introduction to the evolution of the game.

Glad to hear you're going to expand and include Basic. The challenge of course, is which one? Though the three versions (Holmes BD&D '77, Moldvay/Cook B/XD&D '81, Mentzer BECMI '83) are not too dramatically different from one another, there is an obvious evolution -- Holmes is a streamlining of OD&D but contains some tweaks that both lead to Moldvay and presage AD&D, while Moldvay is a further player-friendly rewrite and BECMI is a much more expanded and unique game (but very close to Moldvay at low levels in terms of rules content). It's important I think to note in the evolution that BD&D predates AD&D's publication by a year, and was intended to be an introduction that transitioned to AD&D, where by 1981 B/XD&D (just D&D then) and AD&D were effectively separate but still somewhat compatible games (a result of the Dave Arneson lawsuit if I have my history straight, with TSR insulating AD&D from the lawsuit outcome by giving it a new name).

I'd recommend doing BECMI (perhaps via the '91 Rules Cyclopedia) if you only do one since it is the most different in total, but I think it's important to recount that evolution and timing of the game, particularly due to the split between race-as-race and race-as-class that occurs between AD&D and D&D just as AD&D is published. Since the two versions of the game co-existed but many groups used both sets of materials interchangeably, the differences can be fascinating. (Though I'm personally more partial to Moldvay, in truth, since that's the set that introduced me to the game; I find it a bit more streamlined in play than BECMI.)

Similarly, I think you should consider looking at Unearthed Arcana as AD&D 1.5 (which you mentioned) and Skills & Powers as AD&D 2.5.

Keep 'em coming!
 
Last edited:

I'm really, really glad you guys like this. I had no expectations when I put this up. It was mostly something I did for me.

The next one I plan on doing is this one, mostly because it's the one I have. :D

redbox.jpg


Then on to AD&D.
 

I think the current plan is:

Red Box Basic
AD&D
Unearthed Arcana
AD&D 2
Skills & Powers
3E
3.5
Book of Nine Swords
4E
Essentials
5E.

THEN...we put the various fighters to use. :D See how combat changed over the years.
 

That's the 1983 Mentzer Basic -- good as the prelude to BECMI and essentially a reformatted Moldvay; the really different changes didn't show up until the Companion rules (and again in the Rule Cyclopedia).

I think the current plan is:

Red Box Basic
AD&D
Unearthed Arcana
AD&D 2
Skills & Powers
3E
3.5
Book of Nine Swords
4E
Essentials
5E.

THEN...we put the various fighters to use. :D See how combat changed over the years.

Great plan! Be sure to highlight that you're using the third iteration of the Basic Rules.
 

This is a really cool series. I mentioned it in the youtube comments too, but you overlooked an important point when you were talking about the carry weight bonus' that fighters got. OD&D (as well as Holmes, BX and BECMI) measured weight in coins, not pounds. For added fun in AD&D the strength table calculates additional weight carried in coins, whereas the encumbrance rules refer specifically to pounds. There were 10 coins to a pound so that means a Str 18 fighter could carry an extra 500 coins (or 50 lbs) while a 18/00 fighter could carry an additional 1200 coins or 120 lbs. It wasn't as if a 18/00 fighter could carry a small car on his back.
 
Last edited:


This is a really cool series. I mentioned it in the youtube comments too, but you overlooked an important point when you were talking about the carry weight bonus' that fighters got. OD&D (as well as Holmes, BX and BECMI) measured weight in coins, not pounds. For added fun in AD&D the strength table calculates additional weight carried in coins, whereas the encumbrance rules refer specifically to pounds. There were 10 coins to a pound so that means a Str 18 fighter could carry an extra 500 coins (or 50 lbs) while a 18/00 fighter could carry an additional 1200 coins or 120 lbs. It wasn't as if a 18/00 fighter could carry a small car on his back.

Weight in coins?

Oh, D&D.
 


Weight in coins?

Oh, D&D.

It also means that if you play any of the old school editions of D&D by the book, encumbrance becomes a massive issue. For example if you were carrying between 70 and 105 pounds of gear you were limited to a 6" move. That's only 700-1050 coins. Plate armour, a sword and a shield plus other misc adventuring crap would already put you at around 900 coins. That means that without a strength bonus you can only carry an additional 100 or so coins before your movement being limited to 3".
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top