NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 7854626" data-attributes="member: 22779">Yeah, I know I've been too snarky here.  I really need to learn to relax.  But, the point I am making still holds, I think.  If you want to say that you find 1e more lethal than 5e, for you, then, well, fair enough.  I can certainly see why someone might say that - no hirelings/henchmen, very restrictive chargen rolling, restrictive magic item distribution, and a whole host of other reasons.So, sure, I can see folks making the claim for their game.  But, the problem I have is when people try to claim that their game is "how the game is played".  No, it really isn't.  1e and 2e tables are famous for having shopping lists of house rules, interpretations, and frankly, the way the rules are written, it can be very easy to interpret things fifteen different ways.People talk about 1e being all about avoiding the encounter.  I get that that's how some people played.  We certainly didn't.  About 5th level plus, AD&D characters were BIG DAMN HEROES at our table.  Were we right and you wrong?  Absolutely not.  We just interpreted the rules very, very differently.It's something to keep in mind when trying to compare editions.  1e and 2e were just so wildly varied depending on the table.  I mean, we tended to use the 1e psionics rules.  Which meant that at least 1 PC in nearly every group had psionics.  8 (ish) players most of the time, and around a 10% chance of being psionic?  Yeah, nearly every 1e group I played in had at least one psionic character.  Which, right there, is going to wildly skew my view of the game.</blockquote>

Verification