Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 5035706" data-attributes="member: 32740">First - since we're talking about a REBUILD of 1E and not just a construction of a new edition that happens to use a few 1E ideas a designer needs to identify what elements of 1E are important and need to be recognized.  At the same time it MUST change things in significant fashion to make the entire exercise meaningful.  Keep what works, change what doesn't, yet remain FAITHFUL to the edition it is supposed to be based on.  This is not just make the best D&D - this is make a better FIRST EDITION D&D.  It should be highly reminiscent of 1E, yet should in no way be expected to be backward-compatible. For starters 1E is SOLIDLY class-oriented.  There are no kits, no prestige classes, no pages of feats for players to choose from.  A characters abilities are clearly defined by his class.  If a player wants more he can get his character higher level, dual-class into something else if the character is human, acquire magic items, or else PLAY A DIFFERENT CLASS.  Class-design is not something for players to powergame and munchkinize - it is a DECIDEDLY DM-ONLY campaign design tool. A better skill system is quite welcome - but like the skills of 1st Edition they should be very much independant of combat and not intertwined in it mucking things up.  Skills in 1E are to fill in the blanks of character background and ongoing development but not dominate or interfere with other aspects of the game. 1E does suffer from ability score charts being at odds with what ought to be a common method of random score determination.  The myriad of random generation methods are created in an effort to OVERCOME the design limitations of the charts.  Instead, with an eye towards the simple 3d6, or at most 4d6 bell curve bonuses should be seen with scores of 14 or even 13, not at 16.  And penalties should be shifted down as well with scores of at most 6, if not 5, rather than scores of 7.  The charts should make the generation method work rather than having the generation method struggling to make the charts work.  The grail should be having 3d6 be an overwhelmingly acceptible method with perhaps 4d6 for some higher-powered games. Saving Throws and magic go hand-in-hand in 1E but this is the one area where I would choose to most radically diverge from the source material.  The reason is that it is eminently clear that the too-arbitrary all-or-nothing outcome promulgated by saving throws is an unnecessary obstacle, a chronic monkey-wrench thrown into smooth gameplay.  I'd propose reversing the means of determining the effects of spells from high-level targets continuing to improve their ability to avoid effects to high-level casters continuing to improve their ability to INFLICT effects.  Casters should be making spell attack rolls of some kind against the spell/magic defense possessed by target characters and monsters.  Obviously this means that the entire list of spells would need to be re-written and balanced to meet this new paradigm.  Since that would have to take place the opportunity is presented to re-examine and re-balance spells from other perspectives as well. For example, spells should be kicked the hell off of turf that is supposed to be owned by the thief class.  Bump their level or reduce their effects so that spells from a caster of a given level will not subvert the very reason-to-live of a thief of the same level.  A spell like Invisibility should not be a 2nd level means of tacit immunity, genuine invisibility shouldn't be available until later, AFTER spells that simply improve stealth and limit detection have been exceeded.  Combinations like scry-buff-teleport, if they are allowed to remain possible, should not be so effective as to invalidate countless other tactics.  Effects should not scale strictly with caster level.  A 3rd level (should it be 3rd?) fireball would do 5d6 - period.  Maybe better with a higher attack roll from the caster.  A fireball spell should NOT be doing 10d6 because the caster is high level and making other 3rd level spells, whose power and utility do NOT scale that way, increasingly weak and worthless choices. Something like Magic Missile should be made a basic, reliably repeatable form of attack (requiring a spell attack roll nonetheless) that a wizard can make outside of his otherwise limited low-level selection of spells.  Something that every wizard can do with a wand. Spells and magic are VASTLY important.  They MUST work to create the most desireable kind of gameplay and not result in game-stopping or game-wrecking results simply because nobody bothered to consider the consequences much less correct undesirable trends.  Addressing the entire area of spells and magic would dictate the success or failure of the redesign. And there's dozens upon dozens of other areas to cover.  Like it or not D&D IS oriented strongly around combat.  It is senseless to craft character classes that will then SUCK at combat or be useless in combat.  This applies REGARDLESS of level.  Thieves with low hit points and poor ability to hit should be replaced by thieves whose agility means they can avoid damage and whose cunning and dexterity means that they can make up for lack of raw damage with useful effects.  Mages useless at low levels and overwhelming at higher levels should be replaced by characters whose potential spell effects start at useful ranges and simply remain there without becoming so imbalanced. I personally believe that there are three different rewards for players/characters in D&D and they need to remain largely INDEPENDENT of each other.  However, each is a means of character improvement or development and SOME interaction between them is reasonable. First is experience points.  A lot of experience will be accumulated simply by combat challenges but a viable chart of NON-combat experience rewards also needs to be presented - yet good roleplaying is its own reward and should warrant no special additional benefits.  Increased experience level brings greater survivability against greater threats and includes new/improved abilities.  Second is money.  Money is what buys characters both the basic equipment they need and the in-game mundane extravagences that fantasy adventurers should expect - wine, women, entertainment, and easing access into the ranks of nobility and power otherwise restricted by birth and inheritance.  Last - but not least - is magical items.  Like experience levels they impart new abilities and improve existing ones, but these can't be anticipated by the player.  They have to be taken as they come rather than on any kind of predictable schedule and unlike class abilities (which should ALWAYS be useful) it's up to the player to make the most out of what comes his way via magic. Characters should NOT gain xp for finding/earning money or magic.  Magic should be directly purchaseable with money only on a severely logarithmic scale - as items increase in power and longevity there comes a point where they become priceless in the truest sense of the word.  Characters might be given opportunities to sacrifice experience and/or money to CREATE magical items but the default campaign concept is that most decent magical items were created in the past by means now forgotten or lost, and made by individuals of greater power and skill than characters are likely to ever be. Speaking of which, characters ARE better than normal folk.  The great bulk of the worlds inhabitants are ZERO-level.  Significant NPC's are generally represented in terms of PC classes but the DM should NOT be expected to restrict himself to that.  DM's can represent the skills and abilities of his NPC's in ANY WAY HE WANTS, although the PC class structure makes the most useful guide.  NPC's do not EARN levels and abilities - they are ASSIGNED levels and abilities by the DM that HE feels reflect their past experiences and current strengths, and these DO NOT need to conform to the restrictions faced by the PC's.  1E is NOT a competition between players at character-creating, much less between players and the DM - it's about players having their characters overcome challenges that the DM sets for them in WHATEVER form those challenges come in.  As long as players/characters continue to recieve rewards appropriate to what is faced, reasonable suspension of disbelief and verisimilitude is maintained, and players are given decent opportunity to improvise/adapt/overcome given their normal restrictions it'd be stupid for the DM to otherwise be restricted as to how he challenges the PC's and players. Those, I think, are the high points.  The rest - even including initiative procedure and dice mechanics - are of quite secondary importance.  This is not to say they are irrelevant, just that it pretty much SHOULD go without saying that combat rules for example would be cleaned up and reorganized.  A more exhaustive, detailed listing would be about as long as doing the actual rebuild itself.</blockquote>

Verification