Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Philotomy Jurament" data-source="post: 4528793" data-attributes="member: 20854">Yeah, that's a bit muddy in Holmes.&nbsp; However, note that it says &quot;Elves progress in level as both fighting men and magic users, but since each game nets them experience in both categories equally, they progress more slowly than other characters.&quot;&nbsp; So there's still a conceptual separation, there, and XP is tracked separately, just like in OD&amp;D (and unlike B/X).&nbsp; I'd argue that Holmes didn't really &quot;collapse race &amp; class&quot; like the Moldvay/Cook 1981 rules did, but rather attempted to present the OD&amp;D approach in the simplest way possible. (There's also the use of &quot;Fighting Man,&quot; rather than &quot;Fighter,&quot; which is very OD&amp;Dish, although that's more cosmetic than an actual rule similarity.)&nbsp;Yeah, I don't consider the 1d8 monster hit dice in Holmes to be a move away from OD&amp;D, since that was introduced in OD&amp;D Supplement I.&nbsp;Yep.&nbsp; That's exactly like (and distinctive to) OD&amp;D, too.&nbsp; <a href="http://www.philotomy.com/#magic_swords" target="_blank">Swords are treated differently</a> from other misc. weapons.&nbsp;I agree that it's important for showing where TSR was moving, and where it wanted the customer base to go.&nbsp; I don't agree that it means much as far as what edition the Holmes rules have the most in common with.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Philotomy Jurament, post: 4528793, member: 20854"] Yeah, that's a bit muddy in Holmes. However, note that it says "Elves progress in level as both fighting men and magic users, but since each game nets them experience in both categories equally, they progress more slowly than other characters." So there's still a conceptual separation, there, and XP is tracked separately, just like in OD&D (and unlike B/X). I'd argue that Holmes didn't really "collapse race & class" like the Moldvay/Cook 1981 rules did, but rather attempted to present the OD&D approach in the simplest way possible. (There's also the use of "Fighting Man," rather than "Fighter," which is very OD&Dish, although that's more cosmetic than an actual rule similarity.) Yeah, I don't consider the 1d8 monster hit dice in Holmes to be a move away from OD&D, since that was introduced in OD&D Supplement I. Yep. That's exactly like (and distinctive to) OD&D, too. [url=http://www.philotomy.com/#magic_swords]Swords are treated differently[/url] from other misc. weapons. I agree that it's important for showing where TSR was moving, and where it wanted the customer base to go. I don't agree that it means much as far as what edition the Holmes rules have the most in common with. [/QUOTE]

Verification