TSR Why would anyone want to play 1e?

[Bill Zebub]

I insist players keep old versions of character sheets for a far more pragmatic reason: it's inevitable there will be errors or omissions in the info transcribed from the old sheet to the new, and so the old one is kept as a reference.

Coming soon to a grifter near you: Block Chain Character Sheets!

 

[Bill Zebub]

I assume everyone is wearing gloves or gauntlets when opening a door (just in case the handle has been smeared with contact poison),

This sounds to me like a tree falling in the woods: if the GM never says there was contact poison because everybody is assumed to be wearing gloves, was there actually contact poison on the handle?

I don't always meet the standard to which I aspire, but I try to never use traps (or secret doors) without first telegraphing them, and only do so if it will introduce an interesting challenge to be overcome. I really try to avoid asking for skill checks, where a success means the player takes an obvious countermeasure (such as putting gloves on), and a failure means they take poison damage. There's no decision-making or problem-solving when a player is instructed to roll dice, and the result of the dice determines what happens in the story.

In general I have two categories of traps:

1. Hard to find, but easy to avoid. The challenge is in interpreting the telegraphs.
2. Easy to find, but hard to avoid. The challenge is in bypassing the trap.

Only rarely do I combine both.

 

[Mannahnin]

Coming soon to a grifter near you: Block Chain Character Sheets!

Two years ago.

 

[Maxperson]

Right. I'm saying quite a lot of us back then were missing the context which made level drain more palatable and less onerous. Just as Gary's 1E rules for Wishes increasing ability scores look completely absurd unless you infer that Wishes must have been incredibly common in the games he was running and playing in.

Gygax wrote 1e for others, not to represent the way he played his personal game. His game from all accounts was very different from the 1e rules.

 

[Mannahnin]

Gygax wrote 1e for others, not to represent the way he played his personal game. His game from all accounts was very different from the 1e rules.

Yes and no. He changed how he played and ran over time, so people who report what his game was like from different years can be accurate while also reporting contradictory details.

Luke Gygax has publicly stated* that, at least in the years immediately following the release of 1E AD&D, that Gary ran 1E AD&D mostly as it is shown in the books. That he might cut out weapon vs. armor adjustments for speed of play, which is consistent with what Gary later reported about certain sub-systems he didn't really use or playtest, but generally speaking it wasn't just OD&D with a few house rules in those years, as people have described Gary preferring to run in the 2000s.

*(I'm pretty sure I saw him make this statement in an interview last year, though I'm not immediately turning it up. I may dig further later).

 

[Gus L]

Yes and no. He changed how he played and ran over time, so people who report what his game was like from different years can be accurate while also reporting contradictory details.

This is one of the reasons I like to get away from "What did Gary/Dave/other Dave/etc play at their table" is precisely this. It is both unknowable to a degree (or constantly changing) and not recorded in a rules document. I think for AD&D it's even more of an issue because it (especially the DMG/PHB) is an accretion of a few very productive and intensive years of playing and designing edited together and then sold ... it's not especially coherent or consistent.

 

[Bill Zebub]

As somebody who grew up attending a Christian church that was founded in the late 19th century, I'm both familiar with and wary of with Appeal-to-Authority arguments based on competing versions of founder's intent.

 

[Emerikol]

This is one of the reasons I like to get away from "What did Gary/Dave/other Dave/etc play at their table" is precisely this. It is both unknowable to a degree (or constantly changing) and not recorded in a rules document. I think for AD&D it's even more of an issue because it (especially the DMG/PHB) is an accretion of a few very productive and intensive years of playing and designing edited together and then sold ... it's not especially coherent or consistent.

Why would we really care anyway? If I didn't enjoy Gary's style of play I sure wouldn't care that he enjoyed it. I also think we can know "playstyle" without being aware of the rules mechanics. It seems obvious to me that Gary ran a pretty tough campaign at least early on. I think I'm an advocate of Gary's playstyle but I'd take the 2000 Monte Cook for my mechanics. (Not the 2025 one).

 

[Flying Toaster]

As somebody who grew up attending a Christian church that was founded in the late 19th century, I'm both familiar with and wary of with Appeal-to-Authority arguments based on competing versions of founder's intent.

“Are you sure Gary done it this way?”

 

[el-remmen]

I homebrewed level drain away for HP damage that can only be restored on consecrated ground (through rest or magic) long before 5E ever came out (back in 2E days) and I still use a version of this in 5E.