Making new D&D work for old D&D

[Piratecat]

Focus, please.

If you want to start a thread on bands, the OT forum is a better place for it.

 

[el-remmen]

I use weapon vs. armor type in my 3E/3.5 game.

Though I used the simplified 2E version of breaking all weapons down to slashing/piercing and blunt - and applying the adjustments to armor class (i.e. everyone has 5 ACs: slashing/piercing/blunt/touch/flat-footed).

Thus when a player makes an attack roll in my game he'd say "I hit AC 18, blunt." For example.

 

[Piratecat]

Nemm, does that actually add anything to your game besides complexity?

 

[el-remmen]

Nemm, does that actually add anything to your game besides complexity?

You mean complexity isn't valuable in an of itself?

Well, I can see how some folks may not want to be bothered with such a thing, and if I were running a more standard D&D game I probably wouldn't use it either - but since I run a low-magic game where magical weapons/armor are rare and powerful items of such a type are even rarer (which would make the differences in armor class vs. weapon type academic because of their pluses) - My long-time players and I felt like using these rules encouraged more varied use of weapons, encouraged tactical use of weapons, and created more differences between armor types to be considered when equipping your character, all of which we liked for flavor reasons.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Hmmm.

My suggestion:
Remove every single stat from NPC's except "what level they cast spells at" "nasty things their spells do", "what plus to hit they get" and "what AC they have".

Convert the bonus to hit and ac to 1st ed equivalents if you really can be bothered.

Remove saving throws from the nastier special abilities for that "haha, you're just dead!" feel that 1e had.

Done.

EDIT: Oops! forgot "how many hitpoints they have"

 

[Remathilis]

If it matters any, I converted the sorcerer to AD&D 2e for a friend who liked the concept but didn't want to go to 3e (yet.)

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

That seems really bizarre to me. I've often thought that 1e's weapon vs. armor type table might be nice to implement in a computer game (though it would be far too much work for pen and paper). 2e's slashing/blunt/piercing division left me cold after a week though. If it's no easier to cut through plate armor with a heavy pick than a shortsword and a battle axe and scimitar are equally effective against chain mail, you're not getting much out of the verisimilitude angle. The way that conversion might seem promising would be simplifying the armor end: each weapon has a bonus or penalty against light medium or heavy armor.

I'm pretty sure that banded mail, half plate and full plate have more advantages and vulnerabilities in common than scimitars and battle axes or fists and heavy flails.

I use weapon vs. armor type in my 3E/3.5 game.

Though I used the simplified 2E version of breaking all weapons down to slashing/piercing and blunt - and applying the adjustments to armor class (i.e. everyone has 5 ACs: slashing/piercing/blunt/touch/flat-footed).

Thus when a player makes an attack roll in my game he'd say "I hit AC 18, blunt." For example.

 

[Algolei]

slashing/piercing and blunt

I always felt the 2E Armour vs. Type system required more than three damage types. Slashing, piercing and blunt don't seem to cover everything. Daggers are piercing, but they shouldn't compare to a pick when it comes to piercing armour. Likewise axes and swords don't seem to belong under one category called slashing. Maybe there oughta be two more categories: Stabbing and chopping....