I ended up getting copies of 1E at Half-Price books last night. $9.99 apiece. I dunno if the reprints are diluting that market, but I had never seen 1E at the store before and I was surprised by the lower price.
I am glad to have them as much for history as anything else but I would also like to make use of these. I already own (for various reasons) Unearthed Arcana and the Fiend Folio (both I half-assed used with the RC).
I cut my teeth on 2E back in the early-to-mid 90s. I have never played a game of 1E.
I recently made investments in Adventurer Conquerer King and Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG and having tried them both and like them, I would also like to play those games. AAHH!!! Burdened with the curse of too many excellent choices.
That got me to thinking. What would it look like to take 1st Edition as a base and add modern things to it?
UA, obviously, offers some different things. Already I have thought about using the proficiencies/skills from ACKS. And I would just love to figure out how to bolt the DCC magic system on 1E. That would be the tits.
Any ideas how either of those could work? Any ideas on other systems/things to be stolen?
I would first recommend running/playing some 1E as it is.
It is useful to know how a system runs in actual play before tinkering with it. Once you have an idea how the game runs as a whole, then you can start modifying the parts where change is desirable.
"Ultimate" AD&D isn't what you think, Kaz. Ultimate AD&D is AD&D without the dross; play with the 3 books you've got and go from there.
Kaz, we're on the same boat; I too cut my teeth on AD&D 2e (and D&D RC -- dig the avatar, BTW :)) and I dig 1e. I have the 1e core books in PDF and I'm looking into picking up either the reprints, or most likely a used copy in good shape. I like reading 1e, not just because of uncle Gary's ornate purple prose, but because the game has a certain grit, a certain panache to it that's missing from the latter editions.
I too think that the world deserves a tribute game that does for AD&D 1e what DCC did for B/X, and what ACKS did for BECMI/RC.
Castles & Crusades tried to be "Ultimate 1e" and it didn't quite work out as they intended. I still use C&C, with some modifications (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=503852&postcount=29), when I get the itch to run an AD&D scenario. But I think Jeff Talanian's Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea (http://www.swordsmen-and-sorcerers.com/) (thread about it here (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=18668&highlight=astonishing)) stands a very good chance of being the "Ultimate 1e" we speak of.
Quote from: The Butcher;565235I too think that the world deserves a tribute game that does for AD&D 1e what DCC did for B/X, and what ACKS did for BECMI/RC.
No it doesn't. Just fucking play 1e. My god people, it's not hard to figure out.
You should play two games:
1. AD&D core only
2. AD&D core + Unearthed Arcana
Game play changes between the two with the new classes, new races, new racial limits, new ability score generation methods, and new spells.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;565244No it doesn't. Just fucking play 1e. My god people, it's not hard to figure out.
Chill, TDD. I promiss not to take your 1e books away. :D
Seriously, though. What's your beef with people hacking away at your favorite game, appending a few new things and publishing the result? Three guys in NYC did this to my favorite D&D (RC) and I thought it was awesome.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;565244No it doesn't. Just fucking play 1e. My god people, it's not hard to figure out.
QFMFT
We all played with what rules we wanted to play with. I don't think I've ever met someone who played with every single rule in the AD&D books.
So go with what works for you, and have fun.
Hacking a system is all well and good, but has little value if you aren't that familliar with the system to begin with.
I have never played Runequest. If my intent was to try and make the ultimate edition of Runequest, hopefully I would learn about the actual game, and play it before sitting down to write the "ultimate" version.
Until you play, you don't know if the ultimate version of a game isn't the game itself.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;565257Hacking a system is all well and good, but has little value if you aren't that familliar with the system to begin with.
This. Without a doubt.
C'mon, it's not like I'm experiencing RPGs for the first time ever. There's plenty to be familiar with coming from a background that includes the RC and 2E.
I don't think the Runequest analogy works, in that regard.
And, to me at least, the awesome thing about D&D is the ability to make a gestalt out of all its versions. Or add or take things away. (I regularly created new classes or reskinned old ones in RC, for example.)
I very much appreciate your opinions, certainly, but I would also like some discussion about the actually doing of these things. I don't think ACKS profs would break the game. And I think I can make DCC's spell system work...
Quote from: Sacrosanct;565255We all played with what rules we wanted to play with. I don't think I've ever met someone who played with every single rule in the AD&D books.
So go with what works for you, and have fun.
This. I've been playing AD&D 1e off and on since 1980. I've fallen into a comfortable place of just using the rules I like, and ignoring those I don't. E.G: Never did figure out segments or the unarmed combat rules, so I just ignore them.
Looking back on it, "back in the day", much of the fun of playing AD&D was that every group had a slightly different way to play. Everyone agreed on the core, fundamental material that made up what "AD&D" was. But then everyone tweaked it, and fiddled with it slightly to make it work for them.
Play, mold, have fun with it.
I recommend looking over ADDICT to help understand how to run the AD&D combat system as intended. Note most people wind up using Basic D&D combat with AD&D Options.
http://www.dragonsfoot.org/php4/archive.php?sectioninit=FE&fileid=263&watchfile=0
Some things I learned from it that I didn't understand back in the day were
Attacks/Spells go off on the segment indicated by the opposing side's die roll. If I roll a 5 and you roll a 3 and I try to cast fireball (3 segment casting time), it will start on segment 3 and complete on segment 6. You will still be able to attack me on segment 5 (my die roll) and if you hit spoil the spell. If the spell and weapon attack go off on the same segment then they occur simultaneously.
In a sense each side is rolling to see when the other side goes. The later in the round their opponents can act the better off they are.
When Initiative is tied, weapons speeds determine who go first. If difference in weapon speed is great enough then side with the lower weapon speed may get multiple attacks.
And before anybody rants about how stupid AD&D combat is there is a clear line of development from Chainmail to AD&D. Basically AD&D 1st is the ultimate refinement of the combat system first presented in Chainmail. Weapon Speed, Weapon vs AC, missile combat, all originated in the Man to Man combat section of Chainmail.
With that being said there were more a few things thrown in "just because" notably the unarmed combat system which apparently even Gygax never used.
Oh, I don't think anything about AD&D combat was stupid. There was just 'the bits I could figure out, and the bits I couldn't.'
I know a guy who's been running a 1e AD&D game for a few years now with -all- the rules turned on. SOunds like he and his group are having a total blast with it.
But, I try reading all that stuff about segments, and what nots, and my brain starts to hurt.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;565227"Ultimate" AD&D isn't what you think, Kaz. Ultimate AD&D is AD&D without the dross; play with the 3 books you've got and go from there.
This.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;565244Quote from: The Butcher;565235I too think that the world deserves a tribute game that does for AD&D 1e what DCC did for B/X, and what ACKS did for BECMI/RC.
No it doesn't. Just fucking play 1e. My god people, it's not hard to figure out.
Have to agree there as well. Just play AD&D 1e. Most of what's assumed about it is bullshit. It is "ultimate" as it is.
Quote from: The Butcher;565235I think Jeff Talanian's Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea (http://www.swordsmen-and-sorcerers.com/) (thread about it here (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=18668&highlight=astonishing)) stands a very good chance of being the "Ultimate 1e" we speak of.
There are some strong affinities between AS&SH and AD&D. More affinities than a lot of the clones or near-clones out there. The focus of the game in terms of S&S vibe and setting is much more precise, and defined, than it was in AD&D, and where you have most games paying lip service to the idea of being "in the style of HPL and Clark Ashton Smith", this one really has all the elements you can recognize as being directly inspired by their fiction (including the extensive use of the Mythos, locations like the Plateau of Leng in Hyperborea anyone would recognize, Khromarium the City-State that is close to the CAS equivalent in his Hyperborean fiction, etc etc.
In terms of writing, of rules themselves, there's an element in there that definitely reminds of OD&D. And I do mean 1974 OD&D, NOT "Swords & Wizardry" or "Lamentations of this or that Princess" no. Actual OD&D. I think it comes in part from the way the rules are laid out. Reminds me of Men & Magic.
In any case. That's probably one of the most faithful extrapolations on the actual OAD&D paradigm I've seen. It's not AD&D, or "ultimate" AD&D. You don't "replace" or "fix" AD&D. You play the hell out of it and it fixes you. But it's a worthy homage at the very least, and a great game in its own right anybody who likes actual First Ed AD&D, the old school and/or the mythos and S&S owe to themselves to check out.
You could probably sub out the MM with a different monster book, though, if the selection isn't to your taste.
Also, it's totally bad form to speak of 1e in anything but the most reverent way here. I suggest that you kneel and place your forehead on the floor while posting in order to gain the proper perspective and tone.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;565255We all played with what rules we wanted to play with. I don't think I've ever met someone who played with every single rule in the AD&D books.
So go with what works for you, and have fun.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;565257Hacking a system is all well and good, but has little value if you aren't that familliar with the system to begin with.
Both of these statements are true and are related to what I meant. You don't fix AD&D. It fixes you.
Part of the fix is to let AD&D talk to you and inspire you so that you can make your own choices as a DM and take charge of the game to make it yours. So read the actual books, let the dialog work its way through your mind and imagination, try to play the actual game and make sense of it at your own game table, and yes, you will end up with a version of AD&D that is more or less house ruled, sooner rather than later, and it's fine, since it's part of the point of the game, IMO.
The more you seek to understand the intricacies -and arcane, even- aspects of the game's rules, the more it shapes your own POV and helps you understand the game as a whole. It's an exploration process.
At the end of the day, AD&D made me a better DM. I say, give AD&D a chance, and it'll make you a better DM too.
Quote from: Benoist;565297I say, give AD&D a chance, and it'll make you a better DM too.
Or a child corrupting satanist.
Quote from: estar;565283When Initiative is tied, weapons speeds determine who go first. If difference in weapon speed is great enough then side with the lower weapon speed may get multiple attacks.
We used the first part of this and ditched the second. Getting multiple attacks in AD&D (especially pre UA) was a pretty big deal.
It seemed funny that a fighter with a much faster weapon would only get multiple attacks if initiative was tied. Actually winning the initiative with a dagger vs a battleaxe yields only one attack but a tie grants two attacks.
We threw that out fairly quick.
AD&D 1E is a blast the way it is, I use the OSRIC system along with my AD&D 1E books, its all good, OSRIC is just a little better organized for me now and in one book, I still have to use AD&D 1E for psionic's though when needed, but I tend not to use too many creature's using those powers anyhow, so it all works out for us.....Just have fun.
I have to say I am a bit surprised by the number of people who say the game can't be altered.
Perhaps I misused the term in titling my thread. I'm not saying, "Hey, 1E sucks a donkey cock and I want to put all these D&D Nextisms into it!"
I'm asking if people have used stuff from other games in it. Or have ideas on how this can happen. I'm looking at the books. Things can be changed in it and it still be D&D. And still be fun!
It's weird, because in other threads I've participated in where we talked about the RC, altering it and changing it and messing with it were the order of the day. Seems like everyone played it a bit differently than the last. But 1E is so sacrosanct that it can't be meddled with in such a way? C'mon.
I'll tell you what creates this reaction, Kaz: the idea that there is a "ultimate" AD&D which, to exist, would basically require the original game to be "fixed" and altered with "more modern" stuff injected in it.
The Ultimate AD&D already exists. It's called AD&D First Edition, and it's just been reprinted for your perusal and gaming pleasure. ;)
Welp. This is where I call it a day, I guess.
Quote from: Kaz;565321It's weird, because in other threads I've participated in where we talked about the RC, altering it and changing it and messing with it were the order of the day. Seems like everyone played it a bit differently than the last. But 1E is so sacrosanct that it can't be meddled with in such a way? C'mon.
If you read my post carefully, (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?p=565297#post565297) I've said exactly the reverse. That the game as it is is in fact "ultimate" because it basically empowers you to make it yours, to become a master game master, to master the game and shape it into what you really want out of it.
Now, if you're asking me if I'm using some house rules with the AD&D game, my answer is yes. One of the most obvious additions I've made, which isn't exactly "modern" in the strictest sense of the term, is that I use the Resistance Table from BRP for oppositions and some tasks resolutions in the game. It's funny, because it seems that various versions of BRP today (RuneQuest, Legend, CoC 7th edition now) seem to regard the Resistance Table as something "bad", a "wrongfun" piece of game design that needs to be fixed, excised from the games, whereas I regard it as enough of a piece of awesomeness of the original BRP system, personally, to have retrofitted it into my AD&D games.
Quote from: Benoist;565325Now, if you're asking me if I'm using some house rules with the AD&D game, my answer is yes. One of the most obvious additions I've made, which isn't exactly "modern" in the strictest sense of the term, is that I use the Resistance Table from BRP for oppositions and some tasks resolutions in the game. It's funny, because it seems that various versions of BRP today (RuneQuest, Legend, CoC 7th edition now) seem to regard the Resistance Table as something "bad", a "wrongfun" piece of game design that needs to be fixed, excised from the games, whereas I regard it as enough of a piece of awesomeness of the original BRP system, personally, to have retrofitted it into my AD&D games.
Well shit, man. Why didn't you say that to begin with? That's EXACTLY the kind of stuff I was asking for.
Quote from: Gib;565299Or a child corrupting satanist.
He just has to stay away from storm drains.
Quote from: Kaz;565326Well shit, man. Why didn't you say that to begin with? That's EXACTLY the kind of stuff I was asking for.
It's important that you understand the important importance and stuff.
Quote from: The Butcher;565235I too think that the world deserves a tribute game that does for AD&D 1e what DCC did for B/X, and what ACKS did for BECMI/RC.
Hackmaster 5th Edition - Gary would have loved it.
If you've never run AD&D 1e "straight" I would, at least once.
Quote from: Kaz;565321I have to say I am a bit surprised by the number of people who say the game can't be altered.
Woah there spinach chin, hang on. I don't believe anyone is saying the game
can't be altered. A great many people do just that.
Quote from: Kaz;565321It's weird, because in other threads I've participated in where we talked about the RC, altering it and changing it and messing with it were the order of the day. Seems like everyone played it a bit differently than the last. But 1E is so sacrosanct that it can't be meddled with in such a way? C'mon.
Still not getting it. If you were talking about RC D&D in this thread like you were about AD&D (i.e having never read or played it) my reaction and advice would be the same- experience the game first, get to know it, then change whatever you like. Changes to a game just for changes sake is just looking at solutions to problems that you don't even know if you have.
Man, see why I hate actually working? Well better late to the party then never..*pulls out her lawnchair*.:popcorn:
Quote from: Kaz;565324Welp. This is where I call it a day, I guess.
No kidding. Threads like this are disheartening. It's kind of ironic to see TDD sounding like Ancientgamer1970.
If you play 1e, it's okay to be grumpy about it because.
Quote from: Benoist;565297Both of these statements are true and are related to what I meant. You don't fix AD&D. It fixes you.
Part of the fix is to let AD&D talk to you and inspire you so that you can make your own choices as a DM and take charge of the game to make it yours. So read the actual books, let the dialog work its way through your mind and imagination, try to play the actual game and make sense of it at your own game table, and yes, you will end up with a version of AD&D that is more or less house ruled, sooner rather than later, and it's fine, since it's part of the point of the game, IMO.
The more you seek to understand the intricacies -and arcane, even- aspects of the game's rules, the more it shapes your own POV and helps you understand the game as a whole. It's an exploration process.
At the end of the day, AD&D made me a better DM. I say, give AD&D a chance, and it'll make you a better DM too.
People are going to tar and feather Ben for this one, but what he's really saying is...
Just read the rules and play, and you'll naturally develop what works for you.
"Don't Houserule: Follow the Rules, and the Houserules will appear." It's a French-Zen kinda thing. :D
Hit points: disassociated mechanic or the most disassociated mechanic?
Quote from: Kaz;565326Well shit, man. Why didn't you say that to begin with? That's EXACTLY the kind of stuff I was asking for.
Samuel Jackson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOvBgmZXs5Q) would agree.
Quote from: Gib;565398Hit points: disassociated mechanic or the most disassociated mechanic?
Uhoh, he's bringing the Colbert, look out.:D
Quote from: CRKrueger;565397People are going to tar and feather Ben for this one, but what he's really saying is...
Just read the rules and play, and you'll naturally develop what works for you.
"Don't Houserule: Follow the Rules, and the Houserules will appear." It's a French-Zen kinda thing. :D
It is an art, not a science. You must do, there is no try. Feel the viking hat flow through you. Purple goes horrible with the hat. Melted Gruyère goes on just about everything.
You may want to rephrase the question with more specificity: "What houserules did you make that you found cool?" or "I have gaming itch [X] here, how do I scratch it?" or "What damage dice rules would you use for a .50 cal S.A.W., and do you think that would take down my Great Wyrm Red Dragon?"
Oh, and be sure to mention beer somewhere. It tends to take the edge off from everybody. You may even ask it in the form of a question, apropos of nothing: "I'm thinking my setting will sell things in metric. So instead of a 10' pole, it'll be sold only as 3 meters. Beer?"
Quote from: The Butcher;565389No kidding. Threads like this are disheartening. It's kind of ironic to see TDD sounding like Ancientgamer1970.
My thought exactly, if you want to be bent out of shape about something, how about trying something that's actually important? Say like, medical care or somesuch?
OSRIC, worse than private insurance.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;565376Woah there spinach chin, hang on. I don't believe anyone is saying the game can't be altered. A great many people do just that.
Then why don't we hear from them? Afterall, it is their opinion I sought out when I started the thread.
Also, what does the state of my facial hair have anything to do with it?
Quote from: The Butcher;565389No kidding. Threads like this are disheartening. It's kind of ironic to see TDD sounding like Ancientgamer1970.
It is disheartening.
Quote from: Kaz;565442It is disheartening.
I was going to address the rant that you removed by editing (to the point that I'm in complete agreement with what you had wrote).
Congratulations on finding the old books at a good price. What was the condition of the books?
Quote from: The Butcher;565235I too think that the world deserves a tribute game that does for AD&D 1e what DCC did for B/X, and what ACKS did for BECMI/RC.
I just have to pick a bone with this, because I think that DCC didn't do shit for B/X fans. Now,
Labyrinth Lord is what did the retro-clone awesomeness dance for B/X.
Quote from: Gib;565390If you play 1e, it's okay to be grumpy about it because.
That makes you a better DM?
Quote from: jeff37923;565450That makes you a better DM?
When did the subject change over to weed?
Quote from: Rum Cove;565446I was going to address the rant that you removed by editing (to the point that I'm in complete agreement with what you had wrote).
Sorry, man. I took a glance at the threads and thought I might have been a bit quick on that trigger. And I was afraid it made me look annoyed and frustrated by this thread. Which I'm not, just bewildered by where its gone.
QuoteCongratulations on finding the old books at a good price. What was the condition of the books?
Really good actually! At first I thought the person who sold them to HPB might have got the reprints and said goodbye to a bad set. But there's some scuffing on the top and bottom of the spines, but otherwise in really good shape. They've been used (and I love how HPB leaves whatever papers are in the books, so there's some random notes in the pages, most of which I can not decipher). Used, but clearly loved as well.
So even if I never use them, I can at least bequeath them on down the old genetic line. And that's worth at least 20 bucks and some change to me.
Quote from: Gib;565451When did the subject change over to weed?
When I was running a campaign with the Epic RPG (a great recommendation I got from this site, from a much more successful thread) we played on Sunday nights and I worked at a place that didn't drug test. So, every now and again someone would bring some green and I would partake.
I dunno if I became a better DM. I would think not. I got a bit paranoid a couple times, though, so I know I wasn't better at those times. Someone else might have better experiences, but I dunno if I would do it again. Unless EVERYONE was also toking.
Quote from: Kaz;565456When I was running a campaign with the Epic RPG (a great recommendation I got from this site, from a much more successful thread) we played on Sunday nights and I worked at a place that didn't drug test. So, every now and again someone would bring some green and I would partake.
I dunno if I became a better DM. I would think not. I got a bit paranoid a couple times, though, so I know I wasn't better at those times. Someone else might have better experiences, but I dunno if I would do it again. Unless EVERYONE was also toking.
I was going to post some sort of BS about moderation and all, but the truth is, that although I'll roll without it, I vastly prefer to have it there. It is possible to over do it, though, especially here in CO, where its pretty much legal, always plentiful and the quality is nuts.
Quote from: Kaz;565321I have to say I am a bit surprised by the number of people who say the game can't be altered.
Nah, that's not it. Nobody is saying that. You got a reaction to the idea of "I've never played 1e AD&D, and I want to...how should I modernize/change it before I've ever even played a game of it?"
IMO, if you want to play 1e AD&D,
you should play 1e AD&D. Play the core rules for a while, first. Then modify and make the game your own. This is the same advice I gave several years ago to anyone "Considering OD&D" (http://www.philotomy.com/#considering) (see the "restrain yourself," part). That doesn't mean I'm against making the game your own (http://www.philotomy.com/#your_own).
Quote from: Gib;565458I was going to post some sort of BS about moderation and all, but the truth is, that although I'll roll without it, I vastly prefer to have it there. It is possible to over do it, though, especially here in CO, where its pretty much legal, always plentiful and the quality is nuts.
I would murder a man, I think, to toke up and play in one of your Metal Earth sessions.
Less crusty and more clarity at the beginning of the thread might have been the way to go.
Quote from: jeff37923;565448I just have to pick a bone with this, because I think that DCC didn't do shit for B/X fans. Now, Labyrinth Lord is what did the retro-clone awesomeness dance for B/X.
I agree. DCC is more for me given I prefer games that have non classic Dnd magic systems. :)
Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;565464Nah, that's not it. Nobody is saying that. You got a reaction to the idea of "I've never played 1e AD&D, and I want to...how should I modernize/change it before I've ever even played a game of it?"
IMO, if you want to play 1e AD&D, you should play 1e AD&D. Play the core rules for a while, first. Then modify and make the game your own. This is the same advice I gave several years ago to anyone "Considering OD&D" (http://www.philotomy.com/#considering) (see the "restrain yourself," part). That doesn't mean I'm against making the game your own (http://www.philotomy.com/#your_own).
I get that. I totally do. But after the first reply saying that, or posts with a caveat, I would still like people to post some ideas on the subject. Instead, I basically got stonewalled for somehow not being experienced enough.
Six pages in and we still don't have one single person saying, "Well, back in the day, I added prestige classes!" Nope. Just lecturing.
Quote from: CRKrueger;565397People are going to tar and feather Ben for this one, but what he's really saying is...
Just read the rules and play, and you'll naturally develop what works for you.
"Don't Houserule: Follow the Rules, and the Houserules will appear." It's a French-Zen kinda thing. :D
Well yeah. That's actually what I'm saying. And note I didn't just mention reading the rules, but reading the books, as in, what the modern gamer might see as "fluff text of Uncle Gary" is actually just as important if not more than the actual rules discussed in the books, IMO. That's the "spirit of the game" part, if you will, from which everything else flows, to me.
Quote from: Kaz;565470I get that. I totally do. But after the first reply saying that, or posts with a caveat, I would still like people to post some ideas on the subject. Instead, I basically got stonewalled for somehow not being experienced enough.
Six pages in and we still don't have one single person saying, "Well, back in the day, I added prestige classes!" Nope. Just lecturing.
Sorry, man -- posted while I was still catching up on the thread. The truth is, most of the stuff I've added to AD&D at one time or another (e.g., skill systems, crap from the WSG, etc.) got taken back out.
But take a look at that "making the game your own" thing I linked to. It doesn't really describe specific house-rules, but more of a philosophy or approach. (And while it's not AD&D, if you want to see some house rules I added to my OD&D game, the rest of the site might be interesting.)
I'll definitely check it out. I'm pretty omnivorous when it comes to RPG reading.
In fact, I am pretty sure I read something of yours when I was hacking the shit out of RC. Pretty sure something of yours played a big role in how I did thieves skills.
Quote from: Kaz;565477I'll definitely check it out. I'm pretty omnivorous when it comes to RPG reading.
In fact, I am pretty sure I read something of yours when I was hacking the shit out of RC. Pretty sure something of yours played a big role in how I did thieves skills.
You should definitely read the approach of Alexis in Tao of D&D to thieving skills. It's definitely great food for thought:
http://tao-dnd.blogspot.com.es/search/label/Thieves
Also, he takes an enormous shit on OD&D that I find absolutely hilarious and spot-on on certain aspects:
http://tao-dnd.blogspot.com.es/2012/08/white-box-poll-results.html
My only significant house rule back in the day was to change the basic time-unit of combat from the round to the segment. It has the effect of making casting in combat more challenging, but it also enhances the duration of some spells during combat as well.
Also, I didn't use any of the classes or level limit changes from UA and I didn't use non-weapon proficiencies from the DSG/WSG. Weapon specialization cannot be taken until fourth level.
The other house rule I would add now is that demihuman player characters must multi-class.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;568268The other house rule I would add now is that demihuman player characters must multi-class.
Emphasis mine. Why?
Quote from: Black Vulmea;568268The other house rule I would add now is that demihuman player characters must multi-class.
Why? (genuinely curious as to the reasoning)
I've ran and played by-the-book core-book 1st ed. AD&D and it's a glorious beast, but you need a deep familiarity with what's under the hood to keep it running smoothly.
Nowadays I use it as a toolkit to pillage for the OD&D/"0.74 ed. AD&D" game I run; and having run it I know how it runs and what should work in my game and why I prefer OD&D rules in certain circumstances, etc.
Quote from: CRKrueger;565342If you've never run AD&D 1e "straight" I would, at least once.
The fact that someone felt the need to create ADDICT to explain surprise and initiative in 1E might give you an idea, but you really do need to experience them in actual play to realize just how retarded these 1E rules are. Either way, you'll be reaching for B/X, Holmes or 2E (all of which do it better) in five minutes or less.
Quote from: Elfdart;568293The fact that someone felt the need to create ADDICT to explain surprise and initiative in 1E might give you an idea, but you really do need to experience them in actual play to realize just how retarded these 1E rules are. Either way, you'll be reaching for B/X, Holmes or 2E (all of which do it better) in five minutes or less.
If a game is so retarded to you why on earth would you use it instead of one of the more "sane" alternatives to create an 'ultimate' edition out of?
Thats like saying you want to create the ultimate beef dish but want it made out of pork.
Quote from: Imperator;568235Also, he takes an enormous shit on OD&D that I find absolutely hilarious and spot-on on certain aspects:
http://tao-dnd.blogspot.com.es/2012/08/white-box-poll-results.html
Yet another fucking idiot that doesn't realize that gaming styles and preferences are not technology.
Quote from: The Butcher;568270Why?
Quote from: Benoist;568271Why?
Makes demihumans distinctive and reduces the impact of level limits.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;568356Makes demihumans distinctive and reduces the impact of level limits.
I always thought that swapping the two structures made more sense. Let humans multiclass, expanding their abilities quickly, but make demihumans dual class, since they (almost to a race) have longer lifespans and tend to be more.. focused than humans.
Of course, in several 1e and 2e games I slapped demihumans with an xp penalty too, one of them was commensurate to their lifespan versus a human. (mostly because i had a bunch of dandelion eaters for players)
edit: I won't claim that the multiclass/dual class was an original thought, I'm sure I read it somewhere, but I can't remember where for the life of me.
Quote from: Panzerkraken;568366I always thought that swapping the two structures made more sense. Let humans multiclass, expanding their abilities quickly, but make demihumans dual class, since they (almost to a race) have longer lifespans and tend to be more.. focused than humans.
Of course, in several 1e and 2e games I slapped demihumans with an xp penalty too, one of them was commensurate to their lifespan versus a human. (mostly because i had a bunch of dandelion eaters for players)
edit: I won't claim that the multiclass/dual class was an original thought, I'm sure I read it somewhere, but I can't remember where for the life of me.
I agree with the switch. I hate level limits they make NO sense and have no place in my Dnd. Exp penalties? Sure.
Switching them made more sense to me in 2E. I can see the change working in 1E.
At this point, I think I would just mine the 1E stuff to expand the shit out of any RC games I run. Separate race as class and use the other spells, etc.
The weapon bonus vs AC charts and combat matrices kinda make my face melt a bit.
Limiting Haflings to a maximum of 4th level in Fighter makes perfect sense to me and solves one of the things I can't get my head around in 3E.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;568343If a game is so retarded to you why on earth would you use it instead of one of the more "sane" alternatives to create an 'ultimate' edition out of?
Learn to read. :rolleyes:
I was referring to surprise and initiative, not the entire system.
QuoteThats like saying you want to create the ultimate beef dish but want it made out of pork.
No, it's like saying I want the ultimate beef dish so I cut out the fat and gristle.
Do whatever you want, it is not like AD&D wasn't hacked to all bits by everyone that played it. I don't even think it is even possible to play it straight btb (although one might try). If you are an RC guy, just bolt things onto the RC and run with it, no big deal and no spilled milk!
Its your game yo!
The 1e books are full of all sorts of interesting tidbits though, the flavor is killer.
Quote from: Kaz;568420Switching them made more sense to me in 2E. I can see the change working in 1E.
At this point, I think I would just mine the 1E stuff to expand the shit out of any RC games I run. Separate race as class and use the other spells, etc.
The weapon bonus vs AC charts and combat matrices kinda make my face melt a bit.
Devil's advocate!
At first I was about to agree that the switch makes sense.
Then I started second guessing myself.
One could argue that thge demihumans longer lifespan amakes it easier to master two or three professions at the same time.
Humans having less time would leave one profession behind to betetr focus on the new one.
Hmmm...Now I am not sure which way I prefer!
Quote from: Bill;569036Devil's advocate!
At first I was about to agree that the switch makes sense.
Then I started second guessing myself.
One could argue that thge demihumans longer lifespan amakes it easier to master two or three professions at the same time.
Humans having less time would leave one profession behind to betetr focus on the new one.
Hmmm...Now I am not sure which way I prefer!
Either are arguable positions. From a balance point I just say let everybody do whatever and give long lived demihumans an experience penalty or EL (iirc) penalty like 3x.
Quote from: Marleycat;569076Either are arguable positions. From a balance point I just say let everybody do whatever and give long lived demihumans an experience penalty or EL (iirc) penalty like 3x.
I think that is ideal. Freedom of choice, but a little surcharge for the perks of being a demihuman.
Quote from: Bill;569123I think that is ideal. Freedom of choice, but a little surcharge for the perks of being a demihuman.
I think it's one of the parts of multiclassing that 3x nails. If you want more flavor do favored classes that lessen the penalty slightly.
Quote from: Marleycat;569127I think it's one of the parts of multiclassing that 3x nails. If you want more flavor do favored classes that lessen the penalty slightly.
I like 3X multiclassing for the most part. The one thing about it I struggle with is the way spell casters lose the highest level spells when they multiclass. I would like to see multiclassed spell casters get less total spells but not lose the highest level ones entirely.
Quote from: Bill;569371I like 3X multiclassing for the most part. The one thing about it I struggle with is the way spell casters lose the highest level spells when they multiclass. I would like to see multiclassed spell casters get less total spells but not lose the highest level ones entirely.
That is the bad part of 3x multiclassing they should get some kind of tie to total character level outside spellcasting specific classes for spell levels because it was stupid to multiclass for a spellcaster unless into specific PC's.