TSR Why would anyone want to play 1e?

[Maxperson]

Yeah but Tolkien's Dwarves could cast spells

Not really. There's this one line that mentions spells, but in the context of forging. Dwarves could create magical things through their amazing craftsmanship, but they didn't have spells in the sense of D&D wizard, clerics or even bards. They weren't really casting spells so much as subtly working magic into their craft.

The dwarves of yore made mighty spells
While hammers fell like ringing bells
In places deep, where dark things sleep
In hollow halls beneath the fells.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Even from back in my early days of playing I never understood the arcane restriction on dwarves.

1E was a collection of a bunch of OD&D house rules, even contradictory ones or ones that simply didn't work well together

OD&D says dwarves "have a high level of magic resistance" and uses this as they explanation for them making saving throws as if they were four levels higher. ...
I'm not sure what the fictional or mythological basis of dwarves being opposed to arcane magic was, but over the course of TSR editions D&D expanded on that

Personal conjecture: I suspect that Gary kinda defined his view on dwarves, elves, and hobbits/halflings back before thieves existed and clerics were still kinda new/focused on Sir Fang, so it was Fighting Men and Magic Users. There he saw the elves as 'the' magic user race. We've heard repeatedly that he thought most people would want to play knights in armor rather than spindly mages, so one demihuman race that did that (and only half of the time) was perfectly fine. Giving dwarves an anti-magic bonus was a nice perk -- however he justified it, agreed in not knowing exactly the pathway that got him there. Maybe that was to balance out the lack of option (although I'm wholly unconvinced that balance was part of the thinking. Hobbits/halflings have the lowest level limits and ostensibly the least benefits to show for it). Worth noting that halflings got the same perk and same class restriction.

 

[Sacrosanct]

And ironically Gary tells us in the 1E DMG that he used descending AC in AD&D "for the sake of continuity and familiarity" (DMG 164). Essentially the reason we had to wait until 2000 for ascending AC is because Gary thought, when putting together the DMG in '78-'79, that reverse compatibility for the existing OD&D player base was a higher priority than what made things easier for new players. So instead of 5 years of descending AC we had 26.

I don't necessarily think it was ironic. I think it did make sense. Remember, there weren't RPG mechanics before D&D so they didn't have decades of being used to AC being ascending. In fact, the idea of higher AC being better was counter intuitive. "Armor Class". And in a class-rated system, lower is better. 1st class is better than 3rd class. A class II rating is better than a class IV rating, etc. So the context of a class, having lower = better was the only context they had and the context which was familiar with everyone.

 

[Mannahnin]

I don't necessarily think it was ironic. I think it did make sense. Remember, there weren't RPG mechanics before D&D so they didn't have decades of being used to AC being ascending. In fact, the idea of higher AC being better was counter intuitive. "Armor Class". And in a class-rated system, lower is better. 1st class is better than 3rd class. A class II rating is better than a class IV rating, etc. So the context of a class, having lower = better was the only context they had and the context which was familiar with everyone.

I think it's "ironic" (at least in the colloquial sense) that Gary knew that the descending AC system was awkward and had issues and yet he made the decision to stick with it for reverse compatibility JUST before D&D's sales launched through the stratosphere and its player base vastly expanded beyond those existing folks who were used to the descending system.

Remember that as soon as you start getting into negative armor classes, as you regularly do with more powerful monsters and once PC fighters have a few protective magic items, you start to lose the intuitive value of "first class". "Zero class" is better, and "-1 class" better still. These are terms divorced from the conventional notion of class ranking, so we're getting into specialized game terminology with them.

While some people are and were familiar with class rankings, everyone's familiar with the general notion of higher/bigger numbers being better. And addition is always a simpler mathematical operation than subtraction (in part thanks to the former being commutative). Every group I've ever played descending AC with has had at least one player who stumbles and hesitates when doing THAC0 or similar calculations.

 

[Theory of Games]

Not really. There's this one line that mentions spells, but in the context of forging. Dwarves could create magical things through their amazing craftsmanship, but they didn't have spells in the sense of D&D wizard, clerics or even bards. They weren't really casting spells so much as subtly working magic into their craft.

The dwarves of yore made mighty spells
While hammers fell like ringing bells
In places deep, where dark things sleep
In hollow halls beneath the fells.

There's more than that one line, though. Dwarves could cast spells, which they used for various things, including working metal and protection. It's weird that this would even be disputed - it's clearly written.

 

[Mannahnin]

There's more than that one line, though. Dwarves could cast spells, which they used for various things, including working metal and protection. It's weird that this would even be disputed - it's clearly written.

For our edification and amusement, would you provide a few quotes and citations?

Obviously the line in the poem/song sticks in many people's memory, but so far other examples aren't leaping to mind. Are they from the Silmarillion, as opposed to The Hobbit or LotR?

 

[Theory of Games]

For our edification and amusement, would you provide a few quotes and citations?

Obviously the line in the poem/song sticks in many people's memory, but so far other examples aren't leaping to mind. Are they from the Silmarillion, as opposed to The Hobbit or LotR?

Google is mighty. Google is just

https://thetolkien.forum/threads/dwarves-and-magic.18041/

 

[Mannahnin]

Google is mighty. Google is just

https://thetolkien.forum/threads/dwarves-and-magic.18041/

MaxPerson wrote that dwarves don't cast spells in Tolkien as we understand spells from D&D, not the way a wizard, cleric or bard does. That they instead create magical objects and items.

You contradicted him, and asserted that "dwarves could cast spells".

Every reference in that link is to making magical things, except for a single reference from The Hobbit, about burying and "putting a great many spells over" the treasure of the trolls, which seems more likely to be a reference to Gandalf doing so. Since he's part of the group being discussed in that passage.

The only other reference to dwarves doing magic in The Hobbit is a passage in the chapter The Front Gate, where the dwarves and Bilbo find the hidden door at The Lonely Mountain and fail to open it. "They beat on it, they thrust and pushed at it, they implored it to move, they spoke fragments of broken spells of opening, and nothing stirred. At last tired out they rested on the grass at its feet, and then at evening began their long climb down." That sounds like some of them knew some kind of lore about charms of opening, but this particular instance shows them unable to actually work a functioning spell.

 

[Theory of Games]

MaxPerson wrote that dwarves don't cast spells in Tolkien as we understand spells from D&D, not the way a wizard, cleric or bard does. That they instead create magical objects and items.

You contradicted him, and asserted that "dwarves could cast spells".

Every reference in that link is to making magical things, except for a single reference from The Hobbit, about burying and "putting a great many spells over" the treasure of the trolls, which seems more likely to be a reference to Gandalf doing so. Since he's part of the group being discussed in that passage.

The only other reference to dwarves doing magic in The Hobbit is a passage in the chapter The Front Gate, where the dwarves and Bilbo find the hidden door at The Lonely Mountain and fail to open it. "They beat on it, they thrust and pushed at it, they implored it to move, they spoke fragments of broken spells of opening, and nothing stirred. At last tired out they rested on the grass at its feet, and then at evening began their long climb down." That sounds like some of them knew some kind of lore about charms of opening, but this particular instance shows them unable to actually work a functioning spell.

Right. So Tolkien's Dwarves could cast spells

 

[DeadlyUematsu]

If you're looking for a serious game, 1e will gently fight against you as there's a quiet underlying sense of whimsy and gonzo-ness to it that none of the other editions have really managed to replicate. That sense of whimsy is one of the things I love about 1e.

I mean, I like first-person acting etc. as well, but I'm also fine with someone giving their character a silly name because ultimately one of two things will happen: the character dies fast enough that no-one cares about its name, or it becomes a superstar and the name doesn't seem so silly any more.

My SO's number one character, a Gnome MU that she's been playing on and off since 1995, is named Pearl Jam. And yes, it's named after the band. We all, even including her, thought it was a silly name at the time. No-one thinks it's silly now.

That's all group/table-related.