D&D 1E Mearls on AD&D 1E


log in or register to remove this ad


It was assumed adventurers would retire and build a stronghold when they reached level 9.
Or later. 9th-ish was just the point where a character could by RAW consider doing this, but there was nothing anywhere saying they had to do it; and many didn't.

That said, the system does get rather wobbly once the PCs get to about 11th-12th level; and make that very wobbly if those 11th-12th level characters are loaded with magic.
 


Typically...Anything prior to 2000 the levels went sort of like

1-3 = Basic entry...beginning adventurers

4-8 = The adventuring party. This is where the majority of players adventure and parties go adventuring at. Many never go beyond this point

9-12 = High Level Play - Name level. This is where characters get titles, lands, etc. This IS the high level play of this era (also, if you reached this level, where it was expected that most characters would start to retire and become NPC's of the land).

13 - 18 = Very High Level Play. This is where you start taking on and defeating Demon Lords and the rulers of the universe. (at this point, almost everyone would retire and become the super high NPC's of the world or various planes of existence).

19 = The transition to...

20+ = Epic level play...insane play...super powers play...etc. This is where almost no one ever plays, YOu are basically the walking epitomy of power. Games here can range from 20...the the absolutely absurd of 100th level or more.
 

I do find myself wondering just how close to 1st Ed the game in the OP actually was. What I mean by that is that as we know, Gary played a game that was sort-of 1st Ed but didn't use all of the bells and whistles - perhaps something of a hybrid of AD&D1 and OD&D. I wonder if Luke was doing much the same, or if he does run 1st Ed as-is.

I'm not at all sure it matters - I'm just curious.

(Also, my experience has been that the dominant element in determining the quality of a game session is the other people around the table. System matters, but is much less important. I'd rather play a system I hate with friends that play my favourite system with people I don't like.)
 

Anyone else think 1E is basically level 1-10 and the epic levels are level 9 to 14 or so?

Not I.
The only reason lv 9+ seem so epic is because of the sheer amounts of XP (& by default ALOT of hours of play) you need for each new lv.
Reaching one of these lvs was a mythic event. Often marred somewhere along the line by getting lv drained. :(
 

We started our 1E campaign about 18 months ago, meet weekly for about 5-6 hours, and we've played the following modules:
UK5, T1, part of U2, UK2, UK3, UK4, UK1, I1, C1, I3, I4, I5, S2, S4, WG4

The party have reached: F8, F5/MU7, MU10, C8, Cav 8, Mk 8, T11, D11

The MU gained a level from a book, the Cavalier, Cleric (twice!), and the F/MU have all been level drained at some point. Most have died and been brought back, and time spent dead has led to missing sessions, and thus uneven xp gains.
 

It was assumed adventurers would retire and build a stronghold when they reached level 9.

Maybe in the groups you played with. But my books don't indicate that I should be retiring my characters. Indeed, if I did that, how would I ever get to make use of those followers, strongholds, etc? How would I ever get to play with spells of 5th lv +?
 

I do find myself wondering just how close to 1st Ed the game in the OP actually was. What I mean by that is that as we know, Gary played a game that was sort-of 1st Ed but didn't use all of the bells and whistles - perhaps something of a hybrid of AD&D1 and OD&D. I wonder if Luke was doing much the same, or if he does run 1st Ed as-is.

Well, as Gygax TELLS you to alter/change rules right there in the 1e books to suite your particular game.... I'm going to say that whatever Mearls played was 100% 1e.
 

Remove ads

Top