Re-Reading 1e

[Grimstaff]

The 1e DMG is the single most helpful book for a GM of any kind, of any level of ability. I've now been playing RPGs slightly in excess of thirty years and I still consult it.

It is a masterpiece...

 

[Delta]

Amazingly, it's still not in there...

-O

But it's definitely in the Glossary, I just saw it there.

 

[MerricB]

4

But it's definitely in the Glossary, I just saw it there.

Page 228 in the Glossary.

Magic Resistance - The percentage chance of any spell absolutely failing in the monster’s presence. It is based on the spell being cast by an 11th level magic-user, and must be adjusted upwards by 5% for each level the caster is below 11th or downwards by 5% for each level the caster is above 11th. Thus a magic resistance of 95% means that a 10th level magic-user has no possibility of affecting the monster with a spell, while a 12th level MU has a 10% chance. Even if a spell does take effect on a magic-resistant creature, the creature is then entitled to normal saving throws.

The concept is introduced and described in the AD&D Monster Manual, and otherwise does not get a mention in AD&D.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

(2) I'm glad I already mostly know how to play. Gary was a wonderful and energetic author, and his voice is clear in every paragraph, but holy cow is the 1e DMG a mess. It's organized by stream of consciousness, near as I can tell, and it's very difficult to find exactly what I'm looking for. OSRIC has been a great help with this.

Surprisingly enough, it's not actually "stream of consciousness". In actual fact, the DMG is organised along the same layout as the PHB! The book tracks with the ordering of the PHB sections. This might not be the best way of doing it, but it's how Gary wanted it!

However, there are sections of the book that really shouldn't be there, and the rules editing is dreadful.

It wasn't until Tom Moldvay came along that we actually got a well-organised guide to learning D&D.

Cheers!

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

It wasn't until Tom Moldvay came along that we actually got a well-organised guide to learning D&D.

No love for Holmes?

 

[MerricB]

No love for Holmes?

No, not really. Holmes does some things well, but it's really hurt by him not knowing what system he's writing a basic set for, and the character creation section is a mess.

Cheers!

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

I must confess, while my first passion is 1e, I occasionally cheat on her with Holmes. I do think it's a reasonably good beginners' product.

 

[Henry]

I do have to agree here with Merric; I didn't read Holmes until years later (when I got the 25th anniversary set at Gencon), and if Holmes had been my first intro instead of Moldvay, I might never have become a fan. However, NEITHER Moldvay nor Gygax ever helped me understand the To-Hit tables back then; it wasn't until two years after I started that I really understood the to-hit part of combat. Heck, I understood Surprise, Init, and hit points before I understood the d20 rolls!

 

[jdrakeh]

No love for Holmes?

I'm all about the Holmes Holmes BD&D was my first exposure to the game and, although I didn't earnestly get into the hobby at that point in time (I was like six years old), the memories of that experience are surely the primary reason I was willing to give AD&D a try about ten years later. Today, Holmes BD&D is my favored edition, followed closely by OD&D, and then Labyrinth Lord (which isn't really D&D, but might as well be).

 

[Delta]

The concept is introduced and described in the AD&D Monster Manual, and otherwise does not get a mention in AD&D.

Well, you can't quite say "not get a mention". In the DMG there's 3-4 magic items that grant it. The psionic combat tables take it into account. The "make a demon" appendix has it in a table. Etc.