Quote from: yosemitemike;879029I wonder what percentage of DMs ever used the weapon type vs AC rules.

My players forced me to adopt them into my D&D games because they wanted to feel like it was realistic. We didn't drop them until 2e landed (and we used their chopped down version for a while... then I dropped those entirely).

But yeah - I've hacked and slashed at 1e/2e from top to bottom. Tossed derived stats out/put them back in, Armor as DR, No alignment, complete class overhauls, spell-system overhauls. blah blah blah...

I've slain all the sacred cows, drank the blood, and frankensteined them back together at some point.

These days - in 5e I'm pretty much just creating new content using the base-rules.

I played a LOT of 1e AD&D as a teen in the 80's, with both my peers and adults. Mind you, everything in life was more "Regional" back before the Internet, so I don't know if my experiences were particular to Illinois, but...

No DM I ever played under ever used: Psionics, the Bard class, training costs to go up a level, rolling to see if attacks hit the head if somebody didn't have a helmet, keeping track of PC age and the resulting stat modifiers, or keeping track of material components for spells. I don't recall anyone ever playing a monk, but I could be wrong.

I played with a DM who used weapon type vs. armor type only once. Only once did I see someone use the weird rules for humans switching classes (A guy had a fighter with an 18 INT and didn't want to waste it, so after beefing up with several fighter levels he switched to magic-user. He planned it out very carefully.). I think I might have once played under a DM who actually broke rounds up into segments (The memory is hazy and I might be getting AD&D mixed up with Champions).

Quote from: tenbones;879115My players forced me to adopt them into my D&D games because they wanted to feel like it was realistic. We didn't drop them until 2e landed (and we used their chopped down version for a while... then I dropped those entirely).

I never used them and I don't think my players ever noticed.

I guess from some points of view my houserules can be seen as 'radically simplified'. Mostly out of personal laziness.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;878587We've all ignored a few rules here and there, but have you ever slashed a particular rule set down to the bone? Why?

I was in the process of razing Shadowrun 4E down to the bone (and had run a few playtest sessions of it) when I discovered that Eclipse Phase had basically already done it.

Like most people, my version of AD&D was really just BD&D with a handful of things from AD&D grafted on. Which has a similar effect, but not exactly.

I've used my Super Simple Grappling rules for 3E for so long that I occasionally forget how unnecessarily contorted the AD&D-derived rules for grappling are in the actual game.

Players have never complained about any of this.

I've gone back to OD&D, using only d6 for all hit points, all weapons (except a couple) doing 1d6 damage, and monsters all having 1 attack for 1d6 (except a couple.)

As I hoped, it's made magic users less cowardly, low levels less lethal, and nobody knows OD&D any more anyway.  I like the changes, and the players haven't objected.