Quote from: T. Foster;1002947The 1981 D&D Expert Set in particular was clearly intended as a direct replacement for the D&D white-box. . . .In 1981 TSR revised the Basic Set. The 1981 version has pretty much the same content as the earlier version (as far as classes, spells, monsters, and magic items) but the writing is clearer and the editing and organization are much better. . . .95% of the content is just straight out of the D&D white-box, lightly edited to match the format and style of the Basic Set.

I agree. If you want to know what a well-written and edited OD&D looks like, just get the 1981 B/X version of D&D.

I wonder if they would have believed in 1974 that we would still be playing D&D in 2017.  I know I heard it said many times over the years that D&D was "just a fad" or that I "would grow out of it". Instead both of my girls play, one regularly, one occasionally.

Quote from: DavetheLost;1003006I wonder if they would have believed in 1974 that we would still be playing D&D in 2017.  I know I heard it said many times over the years that D&D was "just a fad" or that I "would grow out of it". Instead both of my girls play, one regularly, one occasionally.

By the time D&D was published in early 1974 Dave Arneson's Blackmoor campaign was in its 5th year of play, so they had some idea of its potential longevity. But even so, I suspect they figured most people would play for at most 1-2 years before moving on to something else. In the designer's notes to the AD&D DMG in Dragon magazine Gary Gygax mentions how some people complained that they'd exhausted the possibilities of D&D within "6 weeks or 6 months" of play and that AD&D had been deliberately balanced so that wouldn't happen. He said "maybe in 6 years you will" - laughing it off as an almost-arbitrarily-long time and showing that even by the time (the summer of 1979 - so D&D had been on the market for a little over 5 years) the idea that people would stick with the game for decades on end probably had yet to occur to him.

Quote from: Skarg;1002812I am totally not seeing it anywhere in Volume I, not on p. 19 or anywhere near it. Maybe I have a defective edition of the book. My page 19 has Spells & Levels, Levels Above Those Listed, Alternative Combat System [zero rules], Attack Matrix 1.: Men Attacking [says nothing about damage]. Page 20 is the Monsters Attacking table [no damage mentioned], Saving Throw Matrix [no damage] and then it switches to the magic system for the rest of the book. I don't see anything about damage done before that either.

There is a few sidelong clues in Volume II - Monsters & Treasure, some of which are good examples of rules that I could interpret several ways none of which seem to make much sense to me (like the dragon damage rules that I have no good idea what they are trying to say) or the best hint (now that you said the rule is always 1d6) is under Elves, where it says that Elves with magic weapons do 1d6+1 (which seems weird because saying that under Elves implies to me that Elves get an extra +1 damage with [only their own?] magic weapons. Oh I see there are more clues in the magic weapons rules, which I think I often don't get to when I skim because I start to lose my mind when I see that after very vague rules on most things, we get almost four complete pages of detailed rules on the intelligence, egoism, alignment hostility (which DO get damage rules), and other (alien to me) weird things about magic swords. The magic weapon damage notes again seem like they're referring to some other context or table we're supposed to have.

E.g. "Axes can be utilized as a hand weapon or thrown 3" with the +1 bonus."
* Is that all axes or just magical axes?
* Why "the +1 bonus"? Sounds like it's referring to something else? This is under a section header about weapons wit +1, +2, or +3 bonuses. (I guess we're supposed to get that this is actually just a key to the specific random miscellaneous weapon loot table seven pages earlier, so the "the" refers to that table and how there is only a +1 Axe listed there.)
* Is that a +1 for all axes in addition to magic bonuses?
* Does the +1 apply only to thrown attacks?
* Like several of the other entries, it's not clear whether this is +1 to hit, +1 to damage, or both.


You mean the idea that a knife can potentially inflict deadly wounds, so may as well just have them be mechanically the same as every other weapon?

So, "Magic Users may arm themselves with daggers only." is only relevant in that there are fewer and less cool magic dagger items, but for mundane weapons it makes no difference and fighters may as well just carry knives to reduce encumbrance, or clubs because they float in water?


Any individual character abilities other than what level they are? My Volume I page 19 does mention under "Alternative Combat System" that "This system is based upon the defensive and offensive capabilities of the combatants; such things as speed, ferocity, and weaponry of the monster attacking are subsumed in the matrixes." But then the matrixes are just Level versus Armor Class, with a 1-2 AC modifier for range (but I don't see any rules for range bands anywhere except for a few specific magic weapons or monsters). So (I just want to be sure I'm understanding) it sounds like both you and the rules say that the detailed abilities and equipment are relevant, except that they are abstracted into a table that does not take them into account. It doesn't even seem to matter what class the attacker is, just their level (and the table columns only shift every 3 levels) so unless there are magic weapons, every level 7-9 PC attacker, whether a Fighter with a Halberd or a Magic User with a dagger, not only does the same damage but has the same chance to hit a target with the same armor class. The differences would be the target's armor (and I see no rules that MU's can't use non-magical armor), hit point totals which are different per class, and the fact that MU levels do take more XP to earn (though Clerics cost less, so if that's supposed to be a measure of fighting ability, clerics seem better than fighters... oh there's also the "Fighting Capability" column of the class level tables, where fighters clearly do get some sort of major bonus to attacks (in the form "3 Men or Hero -1" or "Wizard +1), but I have no way to know what it means ... oh yes, I see, it's the "non-alternative" combat system, except it says to consult Chainmail, so that doesn't apply.


Thanks. I'll give that a look.

One thing to keep in mind when reading about magic weapons is from what I understand they originally lowered the enemy's AC but after A player added it to his attack rolls the rules changed regarding that.
If any one here knows beater please elaborate.

Quote from: CRKrueger;1002883[snip]  These are not the writings of Nostradamus.

With all the blood that's been spilled over the years are you truly sure about that?

Well, Nostradamus predicted D&D:

Bêtes farouches de faim fleuves tranner;
Plus part du champ encore Hister sera,
En caige de fer le grand sera treisner,
Quand rien enfant de Germain observa.

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;1002884Weird. I always assumed it meant you actually trade the points. But now that you've shown me the second option I suddenly see it as the obvious reading. I kind of like it... as if a Cleric's Strength will add fortitude to his efforts as a Cleric, or Wisdom will, of course, help a Magic User or Fighter increase in ability as they adventure.

In B and BX its more planely stated that you are altering the characters stats by shuffling them from one to another. So I assume since both are very close to OD&D that this is probably the case there too as the wordings are much the same. Just a slightly different use in B and BX.

Quote from: Omega;1003162In B and BX its more planely stated that you are altering the characters stats by shuffling them from one to another. So I assume since both are very close to OD&D that this is probably the case there too as the wordings are much the same. Just a slightly different use in B and BX.

How is it in AD&D?

Quote from: Skarg;1003202How is it in AD&D?

Replaced (multiple times, if you count Unearthed Arcana). Now there are multiple ways to generate stats, but none which allow you to trade off 2 strength for 1 int or anything like that. That's one of those places where oD&D->BECMI went one direction and AD&D went another.