What DO you like about 1E AD&D

[JamesM]

I have also argued that Gygaxian fantasy is very far from generic - it is a specific creative vision which is almost unknown today in its real form... cited more often as a negative stereotype than the real deal.

Very much so. Ironically, the success of Gygaxian fantasy is so pervasive that many people know it only through parodies. You need only look around at gaming forums and see the misconceptions, errors, and outright lies told about this style of fantasy to see this.

It's a shame, because I hold the heretical view that, in the face of computer gaming and MMOs, what tabletop RPGs should be doing is embracing what makes them a distinctive form of entertainment and nowhere is that more evident than in Gygax's exquisite goulash of pulp fantasy, popular culture, and medieval legend. So much of what passes for fantasy these days is a copy of a copy of a copy of the Original -- interesting in their own way perhaps but dim reflections of the stuff that created and fueled this hobby for so long. Call me crazy but I think what D&D needs right now is more Gygaxian fantasy, not less. I can get the other stuff anywhere these days, but where does one turn if ones wishes to tread the wastes with Conan, skulk in the alleys with the Gray Mouser, and trade quips with Cugel?

 

[Raven Crowking]

Very much so. Ironically, the success of Gygaxian fantasy is so pervasive that many people know it only through parodies. You need only look around at gaming forums and see the misconceptions, errors, and outright lies told about this style of fantasy to see this.

It's a shame, because I hold the heretical view that, in the face of computer gaming and MMOs, what tabletop RPGs should be doing is embracing what makes them a distinctive form of entertainment and nowhere is that more evident than in Gygax's exquisite goulash of pulp fantasy, popular culture, and medieval legend. So much of what passes for fantasy these days is a copy of a copy of a copy of the Original -- interesting in their own way perhaps but dim reflections of the stuff that created and fueled this hobby for so long. Call me crazy but I think what D&D needs right now is more Gygaxian fantasy, not less. I can get the other stuff anywhere these days, but where does one turn if ones wishes to tread the wastes with Conan, skulk in the alleys with the Gray Mouser, and trade quips with Cugel?

Indeed.

RC

 

[Odhanan]

I'd even even argue that it was Gygax's skills as a writer far more than his skills as a game designer that cemented D&D's success.

We shall not read his like again.

We just might, who knows? I sure would like to see it happen.

 

[Odhanan]

It's a shame, because I hold the heretical view that, in the face of computer gaming and MMOs, what tabletop RPGs should be doing is embracing what makes them a distinctive form of entertainment and nowhere is that more evident than in Gygax's exquisite goulash of pulp fantasy, popular culture, and medieval legend. So much of what passes for fantasy these days is a copy of a copy of a copy of the Original -- interesting in their own way perhaps but dim reflections of the stuff that created and fueled this hobby for so long. Call me crazy but I think what D&D needs right now is more Gygaxian fantasy, not less. I can get the other stuff anywhere these days, but where does one turn if ones wishes to tread the wastes with Conan, skulk in the alleys with the Gray Mouser, and trade quips with Cugel?

Man, does that feel good to read that kind of post...

James, I can tell you that I agree with your post like I probably never agreed to an ENWorld post before. I totally get what you're talking about here. This is a critical point regarding tabletop RPGs.

 

[JamesM]

James, I can tell you that I agree with your post like I probably never agreed to an ENWorld post before. I totally get what you're talking about here. This is a critical point regarding tabletop RPGs.

Thanks. I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Maybe this is a topic for a separate post but my feeling is increasingly that tabletop roleplaying in general (not just D&D) often imitates the imitators rather than embracing its own distinctiveness. This is a point often lost in many discussions about 4E, both by people who are excited by the new edition and those who are apprehensive about it. Fact is, I actually do like computer gaming and enjoy MMOs -- in their place. But they are not, either in form or in content, a replacement for tabletop gaming nor do I think tabletop gaming would be more successful if it tried to become what I jokingly call an "analog video game."

Early roleplaying games, like 1E, didn't really have computer games to look to either as competition or as inspiration. Maybe it's a stretch to say so but those early games were far more literary (in the broad sense) artifacts than are most RPGs today. I think that makes a huge difference on many levels, from how RPGs used to be written, played, and even marketed. Obviously, we can't turn back the clock or pretend that things like computer games don't exist, but I can't help but think something has been lost in the "culture" of tabletop gaming between then and now and the guy or gal who can figure out what that is and how to put it back into roleplaying will win much deserved accolades.

 

[diaglo]

Early roleplaying games, like 1E, didn't really have computer games to look to either as competition or as inspiration.

no they had much better games.

War Games.

1edADnD is to War Games as later editions/video games are to 1edADnD.

 

[jolt]

no they had much better games.

War Games.

1edADnD is to War Games as later editions/video games are to 1edADnD.

I find this interesting because of how much wargames have changed over the years as well. Gone are the days of companies putting out hex-based maps with hundreds of little cardboard counters. I've had some awesome games of Twilight Imperium, Shogun, War of the Ring etc. But none of them compare to the games I've had of Panzer Leader, Freedom in the Galaxy (not actually hex-based), Dragon Pass and many others.

I agree with what most of the posters here have said about 1E and role-playing in general but I think the same applies to war games too. Dragon Pass is one of my all time favorite games (of any type) despite that the rules were clumsy (largely due to much of it being cut and pasted from the earlier White Bear/Red Moon and Nomad Gods which used a different mechanic).

Games today may be much "cleaner" but it's a hospital-sanitized kind of clean and something great has been lost along the way.

jolt

[P.S. Too many great posts here to quote and/or sig but I've never been in a thread where I've wanted to shout Amen! at the end of so many posts. Great thread people!]

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Gone are the days of companies putting out hex-based maps with hundreds of little cardboard counters.

Multiman Publishing
GMT Games

Some of the new hex-and-counter games are very good.

 

[Voadam]

Short stat blocks for monsters
Quick character and NPC generation
Ease of adding on to the system or cutting out complicated parts
Generally easy to run, quick combat mechanics.

 

[Griffith Dragonlake]

Helmet Rules

My all-time favourite hands-down rule from AD&D (1st Ed.) is the helmet rule. While I don't have the DMG in front of me, it goes something like:

If your character does not wear a helmet, then intelligent opponents have a 50% chance of hitting your AC 10 head. Unintelligent opponents have a 1/3 or 33% chance of hitting your unprotected head.

This totally jived my experience in the SCA and it still bears out 28 years later!

I have kept this rule as a house rule in all my games since then. Basically I developed a matrix indexing the AC of the helm versus the AC of the body armour. If the helm has a better AC than attacks are only 33%. If the helm has a worse AC then it has a 50% value.

In addition, I assigned penalties to surprise and listen (later search, spot, etc.) based on whether the helm covered the ears and how much if any of the eyes were covered. How much penalties to surprise, listen, spot, search, etc. is the tank willing to take?

In 2nd edition, this allowed me to grant clerics the ability to wear heavy armour but require them to remove their helms to cast spells. This equated to wearing medium armour but looked a lot cooler in my opinion. Fighters wore grete heaumes and plate mail while clerics wore plate mail but were bare-headed and bare-handed.

Granted this was probably handwaved by 99% of the DMs out there. But for me, this rule went a long way towards suspension of disbelief just as the elimination of chainmail bikinis, plate armour bras, and horned helmets.