Recapturing 1st Edition Feelings

[mudpyr8]

If you want 1E feel, play Hackmaster. It's all right there. Everything you liked about 1E, and fixes for the stuff you didn't.

I enjoy HM combat way more than d20. It's simpler, yet more interesting to me. Don't get me wrong, I like d20, but for classic D&D feel Hackmaster has got it hands down.

Personally, I like more cinematic control of my combats which is why I usually play HERO system. But, what was a regular d20 game transformed into a Hackmaster game and my gaming schedule is much better for it.

1st level HM Wizards aren't all that weak. The spell system is much kinder, yet still feels like 1E.

Try it out. You might be surprised. It's also quite a hoot to do all the old modules with new flair, like "little keep on the borderlands" or "quest for the unknown".

Something to consider. d20 is what it is, and does an excellent job. Change it, and you are creating a different game. There are games out there that do what you are looking for... d20 just might not be it.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Around the time that the 2nd Ed Player's Option books came out, I threw up my hands in despair and said, "I'm going to write my own system." Well, when 3.0 came out, it had most of the elements I was planning on using, except I was going to use a d30 rather than a d20, to allow for a greater range of potential rolls.

After playing 3.X for a while, I've decided that I still need to do a lot of re-writing. In my case, this meant pulling the 3.5 SRD into a single file. Now I'm starting to rewrite the entire thing. In my case, this means:

* Tweaking races to match my campaign world better. Elves and gnomes are fey, for example, and dwarves are (short) giants.

* Finesse weapons automatically use DEX for attack roll bonuses; no Weapon Finesse feat required. I.e., STR is simply never as important as DEX with a rapier.

* Combat rules streamlined. I am thinking of limiting AoOs to the originals: polearms set against a charge and bare-handed attack against an armed foe. I'm also going back to D10 initiative (with bonuses) and simultaneous attacks to speed up combat.

* I'm substantially rewriting classes to reduce their power levels overall. By my calculations, a 3.5 1st level character is roughly equal to a 3rd level character in 1st Ed AD&D. I use 1/2 suggested XP, and still I often find that PCs gain new powers before they've even used all of the old ones. No more.

* Rewriting the magic system in relation to character classes. A lot. Examples:

* Wizards are all specialists. They begin by learning magical rituals, which later progress to spells. In other words, the spell you learn at 1st level takes longer to cast, but by 3rd level you've mastered it.

* Clerics don't cast spells. They channel (un)holy energy, perform rites (whenever conditions are met, often with long-lasting results), and pray to their god(s). Prayer can reproduce many normal spell effects, but the cleric chooses how long to pray and what effect to ask for, then rolls to determine if the god answers. So long as the cleric succeeds in all her prayers, she can pray an unlimited number of times per day. Once a prayer fails, she's done until tomorrow.​

In short, my goal is to increase the non-combat complexity (gambling, debate, etc. rules resembling combat somewhat) while decreasing combat complexity. It is my intent to include in-game reasons to engage in romance, rest times, and even (god-forbid) politics. What I hope to achieve is something where the game creates not only the story of the adventurers, but also the stories of their families over time, and of the world as a whole.


RC

 

[mudpyr8]

Raven: All of that sounds good, but that is no longer d20. That is more your OGL variant of the SRD. Many of the types of rules you mention already exist very well in other games. What you propose is enough of a departure from d20 that it might be time to consider a different rules system. From the sounds of things, TriStat might be more to your liking, with detailed yet streamlined combat and strong non-combat mechanics. HERO or GURPS would be a shift in complexity, more in the direction you are talking about, and both systems allow you to craft the world the way you want. However, both offer more detail in combat, which it sounds like you are trying to avoid, yet you mention things like DEX and fencing weapons so there seems to be an element of detail that you are interested in.

Something to consider anyway.

 

[mudpyr8]

I forgot d6 Fantasy as an option. The new version is cinematic, flexible, and rules light with good non-combat interaction.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Now that we're on the 3rd page of this thread, in the spirit of this thread I'd like to hearken back to page 1 and specifically evildmguy's post, with which I emphatically agree. 1e combat was not really simpler than 3e combat; what with surprise rolls, tables for attacking, tables for saving throws, tables for thief skills, weapon speed factors, etc etc., it could be quite a morass. Combat in my own 1e games took forever to adjudicate, especially when players used buffs and other long-term spell effects. IMHO, the difference was that 1e DMs often just handwaved the difficult rules issues and made up on-the-spot rules to handle particular scenarios. But that's a function of the rules being too much of a headache to actually use, not of their simplicity. If anything, 3e is far simpler; bonus stacking, skill bonuses, attack bonuses, and saves are all far simpler than their 1e/2e counterparts.

That said, there are ways to simplify your 3e games. IMHO, most of the house rules suggested here do NOT simplify your games; they just make 'em different. Some mentioned here that IMHO would simplify your games:

-Don't use a board or miniatures. Just handwave movement and run it as a function of what "sounds right."
-Eliminate AoOs. Instead, give opponents a free melee attack against anyone casting a spell, firing a bow, or drinking a potion, but nothing else that resembles an AoO.
-Eliminate skill point progressions. Just give members of particular classes the ability to roll 1d20 + class level +3 + ability mod for particular abilities, and have done with.

Otherwise, IMHO the easiest way to simplify your games is to put the ball in your players' court. Make them calculate their various skill, ability, and attack mods by situation, and just have them tell you what they rolled (bonuses included) and when they go. I find that it is actually pretty easy to run games if the players are on the ball. Keep in mind that the DM already does a ton of work; one of the nice things about 3e is that the players get to do some of it too. Unless you're really worried about them cheating, odds are that you should be able to run most interactions as (roll vs. DC or AC) without too much fuss. If your players are on the ball, IMX, the complexity of the rules will be de-emphasized, because it's already folded into the game.

 

[Akrasia]

...
-Don't use a board or miniatures. Just handwave movement and run it as a function of what "sounds right."
-Eliminate AoOs. Instead, give opponents a free melee attack against anyone casting a spell, firing a bow, or drinking a potion, but nothing else that resembles an AoO.
-Eliminate skill point progressions. Just give members of particular classes the ability to roll 1d20 + class level +3 + ability mod for particular abilities, and have done with.
...

You have more or less come up with some of the basic elements of C&C here ... heh.

Okay, not quite, but your advice appears to be simply to throw out large chunks of 3.x D&D. Fair enough, but coming up with a quicker version of D&D should be easier than that.

Otherwise, IMHO the easiest way to simplify your games is to put the ball in your players' court. Make them calculate their various skill, ability, and attack mods by situation, and just have them tell you what they rolled (bonuses included) and when they go. ....

This is not the problem (insofar as slowness is a problem with 3.x, that is).

The problem is that many/most NPCs and monsters in 3.x are as complex as PCs! Consequently, the DM must put a lot of prep work into the game, and has to keep track of many rather complicated characters during the game. I can't imagine DM'ing 3.x -- at least at the higher levels -- without insisting that the players keep track of everything related to their characters. After all, as DM, I have 10+ rather complicated characters (with different races, classes, skills, feats, etc.) to keep track of every session!

 

[Psion]

Eliminate AoOs. Instead, give opponents a free melee attack against anyone casting a spell, firing a bow, or drinking a potion, but nothing else that resembles an AoO.

Sounds like it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck to me...

 

[solientious]

Time Spong

In my group we have what we call time sponges. Those players that take forever to decide their actions. So as a rule we give character who have 10 seconds per +1 of Wisdom or Int. If the have not plus then they only get 10 seconds to decide their actions. The time starts once their initaitive starts and I give them fair warning, if they don't act when their time is up. I move on to them next player.

 

[Dr Simon]

In my group we have what we call time sponges. Those players that take forever to decide their actions. So as a rule we give character who have 10 seconds per +1 of Wisdom or Int. If the have not plus then they only get 10 seconds to decide their actions. The time starts once their initaitive starts and I give them fair warning, if they don't act when their time is up. I move on to them next player.

Good expression. I had one of those once, and it was worst when playing Shadowrun (1st edition, so I'm somewhat on topic... ) as he played the Decker, which meant that for large chunks of the game the action focussed solely on him whilst the other players had to help him count out his D6s. He could never remember what to roll, even if he'd made an identical roll 2 minutes ago!

Anyway, interesting solution. I usually use the method given in RuneQuest 3rd edition - characters in this game act in the round essentially in ascending Dexterity order, but the game suggests calling for actions at the start of the round in ascending Intelligence order, so players of smarter characters have longer to think about their actions.

 

[Lord Vangarel]

Hi guys

I've posted an update over on House Rules detailing my thoughts so far on how to recapture a 1st Edition feel with the d20 system.

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?p=1794558#post1794558

Alot of my feelings are tending towards a simplification of systems such as dumping feats and replacing with a more fixed class ability progression. I've decided to post any specifics on rules over there so as to not clog things up here.