[Old Timers] Opinions on the Dungeon Crawl Classics modules and 'old school vibe'.

[Melkor]

Hi folks,

I've been playing D&D (Basic/AD&D/2E/3E) in one form or another since about 1985, and own a lot of original AD&D material and adventures.

I downloaded the White Plume Mountain revision off of Wizard's website, and it got me thinking about the old modules I had - with Jeff Dee, Erol Otus, Bill Willingham, and Jim Roslof art, and how those artists really illustrated the modules in such a way that evoked the feel of the game at the time.

I think that Goodman Games did an awesome job when they decided to bring a few of those artists onboard with the DCC line - the Erol Otus covers on Demon Prince, Mysteries of the Drow, and Bloody Jack's Gold are just plain bad ass, and Jeff Dee's art on Volcano Caves completely takes me back as well.

That said, I own several of the DCC modules, but have not yet had the pleasure of running them...and due to time constraints, I've been concentrating on other gaming material, and so have not read through the ones I own - yet I hope to do so soon.

So for those of you who played AD&D during the days of the G and D series modules, who explored the Barrier Peaks, and who fell viction to the Slave Lords - what do you guys think of the Dungeon Crawl Classics line ?

What modules from other companies do a good job of capturing the flavor of some of those early AD&D modules ?

 

[Xyanthon]

I played back in the early 1980's and the feel of the DDC line really recaptures for me the feel of those old adventures. I find myself primarily purchasing items from Goodman Games, Necromancer, and Troll Lord as they all to some extent capture what I loved about gaming back then. I find myself more drawn to the older style play and I've been frequenting eBay and picking up some of the older stuff I couldn't find or get ahold of when I was a kid. I've also found the OSRIC system (basically 1st ed AD&D released under the OGL) reigniting my love for the old school. Oh yeah, Expedious Retreat just released a new module under the OSRIC system called The Pod-Caverns of the Sinister Shroom that really capture some of that old school feel. It is an awesome module and I can't wait to see what else they release for OSRIC under the Advanced Adventures line.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I like the DCC line, and think that, for the most part, they do a good job of capturing an old school feel.

As Xyanthon said, other companies that do a good job of "old school" feel are Troll Lord and Necromancer. Necromancer does a good job of old school feel while sticking with 3E, and Troll Lord goes a step farther with Castles & Crusades (which is my system of choice). I pre-ordered Expeditious Retreat's Pod Caverns of the Sinister Shroom, and I also pre-ordered Pied Piper's Cairn of the Skeleton King and Tower of Blood, which are both "first edition" compatible. (Anything 1E, OSRIC, or classic D&D can easily be used with C&C.)

Incidentally, Goodman is releasing their Iron Crypt of the Heretics DCC module in a limited 1E version as a Gen Con special.

You might want to check out Dragonsfoot, too. It's an old-school D&D community that offers forums and support for out-of-print D&D and other systems (C&C, LA, Savage Worlds, Hackmaster), including character sheets, modules, etc.

 

[Nightfall]

They do a very decent job but I still favor Necromancer Games some more. But then I'm a sucker for Orcus and Rappan Athuk.

 

[Melkor]

One thing I forgot to mention in my original post was also that the difference in game mechanics between the older edition and the new tend to lend themselves to a different style of play.

Now that I have spend over 20+ years gaming, I tend to really appreciate some of the rules included in D&D 3.5 - The fact that your characters ability scores mesh with a skill system to provide a rule set for determining the outcomes of certain actions.

The fact that you can actually develop 'skills' outside of your class' abilities and your character's combat abilities.

With that depth though comes a bit of an additional rules burden on the DM (at least in my opinion based on my experience with the game).
In the early days of gaming, the DM would really 'wing-it' when it came to determining the outcome of situations not covered by the rules.

There weren't even 'Ability Checks' in early days of AD&D (until some of the latter adventures and Unearthed Arcana), and the DM had to do his best to determine outcomes by calling for an arbitrary percentage chance, or some kind of '2 in 6' chance roll.

As an example, and this contains Spoilers to White Plume Mountain...so stop reading if you plan on playing in the adventure:

In the White Plume Mountain module, there is a room where the character's enter into a cavern from a ledge high above an underground river of boiling mud. Suspended accross the river on chains from the roof are wooden disks that serve as a somewhat treacherous way for the characters to cross. To make things more difficult on the PCs, at intervals, geysers of hot mud erupt causing damage and possibly knocking the characters off of the wooden disks to their doom.

In the original module, the rules don't state what the characters need to roll to cross the suspended disk walkway, it only notes that they are treacherous and slick. It's up to the DM to 'wing it' what and if the characters have to roll some kind of check to jump from disk to disk without falling. The rules do state that if caught by one of the geysters, characters with a STR of 16 or more have an 85% chance to hang on to the chain until the geyster stops (if I remember the text correctly), and that for each point of STR less than 16, a -10% penalty is assessed to that chance.

In the same room in the 3.5 revised rules, the characters have to make DC checks to jump from disk to disk, and there is also a check required to hold onto the chains when being blasted by a geyser. Balance maybe ? I can't recall at the moment.

Personally, I prefer some kind of concrete rule that allows me to easily judge 'pass' or 'fail' for a particular action, and possibly the degree of success or failure....but I have to admit that the free-wheeling nature of 'winging it' in AD&D also added a mystique to these older modules that remains a part of the nostalgia I still have for AD&D.

Just some thoughts I had while reflecting on 'old school'.

 

[Nightfall]

Nice reflection. But for me, if I wing it, I need less mystery, more reality.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Now that I have spend over 20+ years gaming, I tend to really appreciate some of the rules included in D&D 3.5 - The fact that your characters ability scores mesh with a skill system to provide a rule set for determining the outcomes of certain actions. The fact that you can actually develop 'skills' outside of your class' abilities and your character's combat abilities.

I find C&C's "SIEGE engine" system a simpler and more flexible way to accomplish the same thing. YMMV.

(Incidentally, I responded in your thread on Dragonsfoot, too, but since you were specifically asking about 1E, there, I gave responses of how I would handle things under 1E rules, rather than under C&C rules.)

 

[diaglo]

i don't like the fact they are written for d02. my hat of d02 knows no limits.

but that's about the only knock i have against them.

 

[Dirt]

i don't like the fact they are written for d02. my hat of d02 knows no limits.

but that's about the only knock i have against them.

You'll be happy to hear that they're releasing a 1E module at GenCon then.

 

[Melkor]

i don't like the fact they are written for d02. my hat of d02 knows no limits.

but that's about the only knock i have against them.

LOL Diaglo - You have always been, and will continue to be, a pillar of OD&D goodness.