Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Valiant" data-source="post: 3900831" data-attributes="member: 54792">Everything I thought I didn't like about the original AD&amp;D game we house ruled out and gave it a try (over 25+ years) which covers most of the above complaints and then some.&nbsp; What ended up EVERY TIME (following an initial boost from pure novelty of changing the system) was an experiance inferior to the system BTB; so we keep going back to just that.&nbsp; &nbsp;Anyhow, I've found most people haven't really given AD&amp;D a chance (BTB) having piled on the house rules over the years to compensate for percieved shortcomings (or purely not understanding the rules as written). Its very difficult to figure out just reading the DMG and PH, so I'd suggest downloading the OSRIC document and read that along with them to speed up the learning process.&nbsp; &nbsp;One thing I finally figured out over the years, is that the AD&amp;D setting (rather then the rules) is probably the 2nd most important aspect to the game (second to the open ended freedom and immersion aspects for the players).&nbsp; And many of the rules people have problems with (level limits, archetypes without customization, poor hand to hand combat system etc.) have everything to do with keeping that setting grounded to a generic base (Gygax knowing full and well each DM is going to have their own take on what the fantasy setting will look like).&nbsp; By sticking to the rules, even a poor DM with little or no imagination can run a really enjoyable game.&nbsp; &nbsp; The only rule I have a problem with in AD&amp;D is the one involving going below negative.&nbsp; Having to wait a week to heal up stops the action to much IMO, and results in DMs fudging the outcomes to keep characters from going below negative.&nbsp; We house rule that if your healed above 1 you can get back into the fight.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Valiant, post: 3900831, member: 54792"] Everything I thought I didn't like about the original AD&D game we house ruled out and gave it a try (over 25+ years) which covers most of the above complaints and then some. What ended up EVERY TIME (following an initial boost from pure novelty of changing the system) was an experiance inferior to the system BTB; so we keep going back to just that. Anyhow, I've found most people haven't really given AD&D a chance (BTB) having piled on the house rules over the years to compensate for percieved shortcomings (or purely not understanding the rules as written). Its very difficult to figure out just reading the DMG and PH, so I'd suggest downloading the OSRIC document and read that along with them to speed up the learning process. One thing I finally figured out over the years, is that the AD&D setting (rather then the rules) is probably the 2nd most important aspect to the game (second to the open ended freedom and immersion aspects for the players). And many of the rules people have problems with (level limits, archetypes without customization, poor hand to hand combat system etc.) have everything to do with keeping that setting grounded to a generic base (Gygax knowing full and well each DM is going to have their own take on what the fantasy setting will look like). By sticking to the rules, even a poor DM with little or no imagination can run a really enjoyable game. The only rule I have a problem with in AD&D is the one involving going below negative. Having to wait a week to heal up stops the action to much IMO, and results in DMs fudging the outcomes to keep characters from going below negative. We house rule that if your healed above 1 you can get back into the fight. [/QUOTE]

Verification