D&D General Nerfing Wizards the Old Fashioned Way: Magic User in 1e

[DND_Reborn]

Rod of Resurrection!

Yeah, finding one of those when you had elves in the party was like a gift from the Gods LOL!

 

[Helldritch]

Here's my experience with these examples:

Weapon v. AC. = We used about half the time. The reason we dropped it was because we kept having to equate monster weapons to "weapon-types". It made a lot of sense, but wasn't worth the hassle and didn't really impact very much. It's greatest impact was it made sense to have weapons very heavy armor vs. no armor, etc., which was very much the case historically IME.

Elves cannot be raised or resurrected (except one exception, because reasons). = Yep. We always enforced this. Reincarnate (take your chances), wish, or nothing.

Constitution score is the max times for raise/resurrection, and a failed role is perma death. = Yep. Always used this role as well, including losing a point of CON when you were brought back.

Even friendly castings of polymorph require system shock. = Yep. Even if you know it is coming, it is quite a shock.

Casting certain spells (such as haste, or wish) that ages you requires a system shock check (that's an oldie but a goodie). = Hmm.. I remember the aging, but I don't recall it requiring a SS check?

Items have saving throws (that's the "Dragon melts your magic items" rule). = Oh, YEAH! As a DM I LOVED this one... you failed your save, then all your items must make a save as well. LOL, so many times Disintegrate and Dragon breath meltings... ah, fond DM memories here.

Weapon vs AC: Always played with these in 1ed. Everybody had a photocopy of the pages. I would call when a monster had an equivalent armor or not.

Elves can't be resurected. Always enforced it to the letter. No exeptions.

Failed con rolls on raise: Always enforced it to the letter.

System shock rolls on aging, polymorphing and what not: Again, a strict enforcing of this rules. This was keeping haste in check as well as other powerful abuses of the polymorph other spell.

Item saving throws: Again, that was a great fun (for the DM) to see the look on the players' face. It was also a great way to remove magical items from potential treasures. It was working on enemies too. I remember a wizard salivating to get his hands on the staff of power a lich was holding only to see it get destroyed when the lich failed its save vs a fire ball... I still remember the howling NOOOOOOOOOOOO!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Everybody had a photocopy of the pages.

This was a big issue for me - I simply didn't have access to photocopying back when I was playing 1e, so we where stuck with just one rulebook.

 

[DND_Reborn]

we where stuck with just one rulebook.

That would SUCK... Sorry to hear it.

I could see why your group might have decided to drop some rules in that case and you'd have a different experience if that was the case.

 

[Wasteland Knight]

Me neither. But you'd be surprised as how many DMs tables were ignoring or simply did not apply them. And, again, it was leading to all kind of abuses.

But I don't want limitations. I want to play my class/character/race without limitations!
It is by the ignoring of the rules and limitations that a lot of misconceptions came about. Stat requirements were also a great offender.
I want to play a paly but I need 17 charisma... Give me the paly... Removing or allowing a stat adjustement to make paladin more common led to the Lawful Stupid in an attempt to "restrain" people from making too many paladins... With the stat adjustement, no need to restrain them through the lawful stupid as they were rare enough as they were. Today's paladin are no longer fixed in alignment and no longer represent the epitome of knighthood as they did back in 1ed.

Same goes with MU. Their spell allotement was so strong and their potential to boost other was so great that the only limiting factor was the limitations on casting and their low hp. When 3rd edition removed these, it led to the CODZILA of 3.xed and directly to the nerf of casters in 5ed through the concentration mecanic (no more zounds of boosting spells stacking on the characters) and the removal/modification of summon spells (that were so abused with casters in 3.xed). The great idea of touch attack was removed as the abuses of ranged touch attacks were so vehemently shown with the CODZILA that even I, is quite happy to see that idea going down the drain.

Each time a limitation is removed/ignored, it allows for abuses. It was true in 1ed. It is still in 5ed.

I’m not quite sure if the logic train here. I don’t understand how changes to the MU from 1st to 3rd are related to Clerics/Druids?

Also, I disagree with what wgat I think I read as indication that D&D went from something “balanced” at 1st level to unbalanced in 3rd?

I don’t think 1e, 2e or anything flavor of 3e were ever “balanced”.

4E may very well have shown what a highly “balanced” rule set would be, but it was about as interesting as unseasoned gruel.
I have no idea about 5E, but it’s clearly a popular ruleset.

 

[Wasteland Knight]

Ultimately, I don’t think nail biting over “balance” or “limitations” of a ruleset ultimately make it any more fun.

Certainly any RPG rules need a certain level of consistency and internal logic, but I think the returns start diminishing once your a ways down the balance road

If a persons main interaction with a particular RPG rule set is long arguments about it on the internet, then maybe a different RPG is in order.

 

[Musing Mage]

I've toyed around with something similar myself, but if you want it all comparable to 1E you don't want a 50/50 chance for learning 1st level spells, etc.

Also, it should be a spellcasting check (so the PC can add proficiency modifier) instead of just an Intelligence check, unless you want it to be harder to learn spells, which you might... shrug For "school-specific" spells, I would double the proficiency bonus.

Here is some math for it:

With DC 15 + spell level:
View attachment 125716
With DC 10 + spell level
View attachment 125717
Since 65% was more typical in 1E, a DC 10 + spell level Intelligence (spellcasting) check works better IMO anyway.

Also, here is the DC 10 + spell level with double proficiency for "school-specific" spells:
View attachment 125718
So, specialty spells would be very likely to learn.

That's some mighty fine number crunching. I hadn't gotten further than the theory of it, since the likelihood of running a full fledged 5e campaign isn't high right now... but will definitely think more if I do.

My experience is almost exactly like yours!

1. I loved ... LOVED Weapon v. AC. It really made the different weapons "sing" in terms of differentiation. But it was too finicky and limited, given the sheer number of monster encounters. So that was dropped. Begrudgingly.

I use most of the fiddly elements of 1st ed, for many of the reasons stated above - once you start removing things or easing restrictions the seams start to pop.

With Weapon type Vs AC the thing to understand is that it doesn't apply to ALL ACs, only to artificial armour worn by creatures. It's easiest to shorthand it to 'Natural Armour' in which case you ignore the modifiers entirely, and 'Armour Type' in which case you use the values according to your weapon. The extra calculation doesn't slow things down much (especially of the players have their #s on the sheet in front of them) and certainly adds a layer to weapon choice.

I've seen threads where people try and apply it broadly to natural armour types as well, but that just seems like unnecessary extra work to me for a system that works as it is.

For Weapon speeds - again here's an example where keeping it all adds a level of nuance that makes combat fun and chaotic in certain circumstances. A tied initiative roll between combatants prompts a speed factor check, and if the faster weapon is twice as fast, (or 5 pts faster), then that attacker gets a bonus attack before their normal attack. A dual-wielding thief with daggers who is behind his opponent will thank you kindly for this little rule.

Regarding the Polymorph spells - it's actually not as dire as you mentioned - Polymorph Self doesn't require the system shock, though a wizard can't use it on a friend, only themself. Polymorph Other is meant as an offensive spell, so there's no friendly version, thus the SS roll.

But the Wand of Polymorph allows for both options, and can be used to safely polymorph an ally without requiring the SS roll.

As to other restrictions, hell yes, I definitely keep them. I don't get complaints about low level limits for demi-humans, because the trade off it worth it when you look at the fine print.

Elves and Half-elves can be Fighter-Magic users and cast in full armour. If you want to favour the wizard an Elf has a base cap of level 5 as a fighter, they have a base cap of 9 as a Magic user, if you want to favour the fighter a Half-Elf has a base cap of 6 as fighter and 6 as magic user. Those caps can, of course, be increased with higher stats.

Half-elves and Half-orcs are the only classes that can multiclass as cleric. One of my players made a Half-Elven Fighter/Cleric/Magic-user once and he was a dynamo. Or how about a Druid/Magic-user! Talk about potent.

Being able to enter a combat in full armour and still have access to all of your magic is immensely powerful in 1st Ed.

Of course, all of this is according to taste. I fully understand where some players will simply want a fast and easy system, but for me one of the reasons 1st ed is compelling is the nuance. The little details that seem cumbersome on the surface but add an otherwise unexpected layer of satisfaction to the experience.

And just so my ramblings don't go entirely off-topic - the 'restrictions' imposed on 1st Ed Magic users are a feature, not a bug. The randomizing of spells, the creation of a block list of spells you can't learn because you failed the roll, the cap on how many you can know based on your intelligence... all of that contributes to a satisfying game from the perspective of the challenge. All of those things make you think about your spell acquisition.

I genuinely think some of that would enhance the experience of wizards in 5e by adding another dynamic for the players to consider as their character grows.

Anyway, I'm rambling. Such are my thoughts on the issue.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That's some mighty fine number crunching.

LOL thanks. Hope it helps when you decide what you want to try out. Good luck!

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Regarding the Polymorph spells - it's actually not as dire as you mentioned - Polymorph Self doesn't require the system shock, though a wizard can't use it on a friend, only themself. Polymorph Other is meant as an offensive spell, so there's no friendly version, thus the SS roll.

But the Wand of Polymorph allows for both options, and can be used to safely polymorph an ally without requiring the SS roll.

The Wand of Polymorph! This actually brought up one of the weirdest ethical dilemmas. So it acts as polymorph (other) spell at range, which requires a system shock check.

But it acts as a polymorph (self) when you touch someone with it, which doesn't (because polymorph self has a specific exclusion from SS). But you can use it offensively- it requires a "to hit" roll against an unwilling target.

Which meant that if you were an ethical or good-aligned Magic User with this wand, you were obligated to not use it at range if you did not intend to kill your opponent. This came up in a game. There was also the unnecessary involvement of a Paladin. Good times!

 

[Wasteland Knight]

As to other restrictions, hell yes, I definitely keep them. I don't get complaints about low level limits for demi-humans, because the trade off it worth it when you look at the fine print.

Honest question - how many times have you had a player hit the level cap on a demihuman character and then keep happily playing along with no possible chance to advance or gain hp? Because I find this scenario really, really hard to wrap my head around.

I have plenty of firsthand experiences of playing demihumans in various 1E games. Generally, the level limits were rarely an issue because, as we almost always started at 1st level, most games were done well before anyone came to a level restriction.

In the handful of cases where this actually happened (I.e. hit the level cap), tge level cap rule was always house ruled away to maintain peace at the table.