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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="evildmguy" data-source="post: 5036364" data-attributes="member: 6092">I haven't read all of the replies, yet, but have been fascinated by the break down of what 1E was and is.  Some very nice insights into 1E.  When I read this, my take was more like this.  I have somehow been put back in time to myself and the only thing that exists in 1E DND.  I have my ideas and memories of 2E/3E/4E and any other gaming system but it is now 1980 and I am about to play DND.  What would I do?  For me, then, this is about style and what I saw happen at the table.  I was never involved in a game where we hired henchmen/hirelings and went with a small army to a dungeon.  The game was about this group of heroes and their story.  We were trying to emulate books and movies, such as Amber, Krull or LadyHawke.  We were adventurers, trying to make name level and lots of gold and have lots of good stories about how we got there.  Therefore, what would I do?  Ability scores - I would try use a more unified table for them.  Races - I would try and make races mean something more for all levels.  For me, whether one was a human fighter or dwarf fighter stopped mattering around 4th level.  I would try and make it obvious what race a character was.  Classes - I would try and make them all fun to play.  I heard many times, as the DM, "oh, all right, I will play the cleric this time" as if it was a penalty.  Sometimes said about the fighter.  The mage was definitely the advanced class as it was tough to play but most versatile and therefore seemed to be the most fun.  It had more to track and more options.  How gets into a long iterative thought process (and perhaps play testing) but the point is that if anyone doesn't want to play a class, it needs to be redone.  I would leave multi classing but only two classes, not three.  Probably not dual classing.  The XP tables need to be redone as a multi class character was never more than two levels behind, that I saw, and were more effective.  I would also increase hit points at first level but try and keep them lower overall, spread abilities out over more levels (i.e. paladin), increase damage that fighters can do at some point, get rid of multi attacks, and other things.  (I am thinking of having a system of a mage getting an at will, encounter and daily powers in some way but not sure how at the moment.)  Levels - with the idea of "name level" being the end game, (by overall character level, not one class level) I would leave demi human limits in. I am thinking of 11th level, maybe has high as 14, for the ultimate final level. Spells - I would remove any save or die affects for either more saves or damage.  I would freeze spell effects instead of increasing with level.  I like the idea of improving "skills" before giving the end all spell, i.e. invisibility.  Monsters - definitely have minions in some way.  That's about as far as I have gotten with the ideas.  I really liked the analysis of what saves did back then but still prefer F/R/W of 3E.  I like the idea of spell casters needing to roll to hit against some defense.  In the end, I would favor fun and drama over the mechanics.  But again, this is all based on what what I saw in my groups and what we were trying to do with the game.  Good topic!  Thanks!edg</blockquote>

Verification