Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Griswold" data-source="post: 390922" data-attributes="member: 5500">I guess in a sense I'm an old timer myself. i started back in '84 with the red box basic set, and then went on to expert. I liked OD&amp;D. compared to the other flavors of D&amp;D, it was rather rule-lite and had a flavor all it's own. it was simple.&nbsp;then we discovered AD&amp;D (1st ed.)&nbsp; and moved on to that.&nbsp; We played that until 2nd ed. come out and again moved on.&nbsp; 1st ed. had alot of little touches that even today stand out in my mind, like the little cartoons in the DMG. I liked 2nd ed. too, though once the player option books came out, I think the system got alittle out of hand, and although they were optional rules, the concept was very cool; even if it was poorly balanced, IMHO.Now, when 3E came out, I became a fanboy our first session playing. I think it's true to the feel of 1st ed. and a whole lot prettier.I think I may check out the HM PH for fun, but I don't envision leaving 3E behind.Gris.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Griswold, post: 390922, member: 5500"] I guess in a sense I'm an old timer myself. i started back in '84 with the red box basic set, and then went on to expert. I liked OD&D. compared to the other flavors of D&D, it was rather rule-lite and had a flavor all it's own. it was simple. then we discovered AD&D (1st ed.) and moved on to that. We played that until 2nd ed. come out and again moved on. 1st ed. had alot of little touches that even today stand out in my mind, like the little cartoons in the DMG. I liked 2nd ed. too, though once the player option books came out, I think the system got alittle out of hand, and although they were optional rules, the concept was very cool; even if it was poorly balanced, IMHO. Now, when 3E came out, I became a fanboy our first session playing. I think it's true to the feel of 1st ed. and a whole lot prettier. I think I may check out the HM PH for fun, but I don't envision leaving 3E behind. Gris. [/QUOTE]

Verification