A'koss said:
Uh... I don't think so. But if you can find it, I'll happily concede the point.
Okay, you got me man.

I can't find it, though honestly it's been a while since I've played 1e. I distinctively remember seeing it in an AD&D book though, so perhaps it was in UA or the 2e DMG.
It's worth noting that you can use the Massive Damage rule, or at least that concept, no matter what the edition. I think it's a good, simple rule, especially since you can scale it up or down to set the desired "grittiness" level for your campaign.
A'koss said:
Actually, I qualified that particular rule as AD&D in my post as I don't remember how BD&D handled it. I'll take your word for it though...
It varies by BD&D edition (yes, there have been a few of those: '77 Holmes, '81 Moldvay, '83 Mentzer). I use the Moldvay book, where the rule of thumb is: you always miss on natural 1, and you always hit on natural 20 (again, except in cases where a magic/silver weapon is needed). I also believe, but can't confirm, that AD&D 2e also has the same rule of thumb.
A'koss said:
Heh... I'll just have to assume you're right here as I've never, ever, tried to make heads or tails of the AD&D grapple/overbearing rules.

And for those of you who whine about how difficult 3e makes grappling, just
glance over the AD&D rules sometime... (sorry Gary!

)
Well don't quote me on that. I never used those rules in the DMG.

I'm just going on the basis that a sane DM would make sure the fighter was eventually brought to his knees and captured or slain, even if it took a few hundred soldiers to do the job. AC helps you survive attacks, but it's not a cure-all. The odds are simply not in his favor, and the sheer numbers of the opposition should grant them non-trivial bonuses. In fact, in a situation like that, I would be tempted to use the "squad combat" mechanism from module M5 Talons of Night, which allows a trained unit of low-level NPCs/monsters to attack as a single entity of much higher level.
A'koss said:
I've always said that D&D models only one thing well... itself.
This is not a bad thing! I've loved playing it and I'm sure you've loved playing it. However, it does not work well trying to model a lot of the settings it drew inspiration from. It's very much magic-gear based (far more than even LotR) and superheroic in nature (all editions). If you want to run a Conan/Lanhkmar/King Arthur style setting, D&D isn't the way (or at least the best way) to go.
There was actually a Lankhmar setting (and modules) for AD&D. There's an interesting discussion about it here:
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=194162
It sounds pretty good, but I don't know how faithful it is to Lieber's world.
Conan can probably be done in a similar fashion too. Middle-earth is harder to pin down, but I'm sure many have used some modified version of D&D for that. Heck, I think there was a d20 M-E project happening on this very site a while back... And on Dragonsfoot, there have been several discussions in the Classic D&D forum on how to handle M-E. OD&D/BD&D are particularly well-suited to this kind of thing, since they're quite generic (read the monster, spell and magic item descriptions, you'll see what I mean...) and thus those games make a good "starting point". AD&D though is much more specific and one would need to deal with a lot more "cruft" if he wanted to use it to model something outside or on the edges of its design parameters.