Quote from: hedgehobbit on October 13, 2022, 12:46:55 PM
Using only the modifiers is actually much more useful mechanically. As a normal value is 0, you can write a character out by simply listing only the exceptional abilities. For example, your orc boss might be written as:

Orc Boss, 3 hd, hp 12, Str+2, Cha+1

This means you can easily give ability scores to monsters or NPCs and these characters can quickly become playable characters if you need to replace losses.

I find that the best reason for having ability scores and modifiers are when the modifiers are not on a regular scale with the scores and the scores can change over time.  That's why I kept them.  Because it makes explaining how an ability score increases work extremely simple for the players, even though the math for the bumps and the modifiers are putting a slow, steady penalty on improving the high ones.  In other words, the point of having ability scores as a separate thing is to function as a specialized scale.  If a system abstracts out all the reasons for the scale or makes it linear, then the ability score become a useless vestigial mechanic.

However, I also did my scale and modifiers very carefully to make +0 the default, for exactly the reason you give.  I don't need the scale with monsters or most NPCs, because their progress is not being tracked.  Any increase they get is GM fiat.  In my monster listing, I don't even include the values, and just assume that a +1 is the minimum scale number to get that modifier, and so on.  The only reason I'd even need to do that is if the creature joined the party and started getting experience.

Quote
I've found that one of the biggest contributor to hit point bloat at high levels is bonus hit points at first level. I solved this problem by having characters reroll their hit points every level but only using the new number if it is higher than the current number. This way, you can hand out bonus hit point to low level characters, such as letting them start with hit points equal to CON, but they won't have any more hit points than normal at 10th level.

Constitution bonuses are also a big factor but that can be solved by reigning in ultra-high ability scores during character creation.

I also do the reroll of hit points, for the same reasons.  And directly on topic, that trick is one I wish I'd have thought of when I first started running D&D.  I dropped Con out of my game entirely, and replaced it's boost hit points effect with a more limited one based on several minor boosts.  My reward was last session when a dwarf (one minor boost) warrior (another minor boost) took a huge hit and kept fighting.  There was this stunned pause when one player said, "How'd you take that?  Oh, I forgot.  You're a dwarf."  And suddenly dwarves were cool again in our group.

The wrestling rules are... horrifying, lol.

Saving throws have no consistent logic behind them (see my dumb crap here http://www.dizzydragon.net/deconstructing_bx_dnd/start about halfway down the page for analysis).  I think they were just chosen to try to "balance" the classes, but class balance is an illusion anyway imo.

Thieves are pretty b0rken, especially in BECMI/RC, where they stretched the (already crappy) 1-14 skill chart over 36 levels, making thieves even more worthles than they already were.  2e improved upon this a good bit with the point buy dealio, so you could min-max a little and actually contribute to the party a little.  But they were still pretty bad even in 2e, heh.

Women having the same physical strength score as men is ridiculous.  Even in 1e they tended to be the same, because it was only the upper limit that was capped, but the stat was still generated the same for both.  If we had to make it "fair", we could give women a charisma bonus instead, to reflect how society tends to treat women better than men.  But I guess that's not unique to OSR stuff, and perhaps a can of worms that I ought not risk opening in the first place.

Quote from: FingerRod on October 13, 2022, 07:34:27 AM
Least favorite? Thief abilities—specifically the low percentages. Bad design. Makes me wonder how many yes men stared at their feet and said nothing after Gary pitched it.

If I had to pick one thing? Thief skills need a complete rework.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on October 13, 2022, 12:39:40 PM

Quote from: FingerRod on October 13, 2022, 07:34:27 AM
Least favorite? Thief abilities—specifically the low percentages. Bad design. Makes me wonder how many yes men stared at their feet and said nothing after Gary pitched it.

I don't think Gary had to pitch ideas. He just wrote whatever he felt like.

But if you look at the write up of the pre-Gygax thief it works a bit different. In the original rules, a first level thief could have a 50% chance to pick locks at first level and a 90% chance at 5th level. The big difference, was that you had to pick skills from a list so a first level thief might not even be able to pick a lock at all.

I guess Gygax took away the choice and just game every thief a small increase in every possible skill as they leveled up. But in the original rules, higher level thieves could chose from a wide variety of special skills such as evaluate treasure, escape from being tied up, concoct antidotes to poisons, mimic other people's voices, break codes, track enemies etc.

You're talking about the Aero Hobbies thief right? I didn't know it was quite that high.

Another vote for Vancian Magic.  It never seemed "believable" for me (meaning--it was just weird, didn't seem like a mechanic that made sense).  TFT's "fatigue" made more sense.

AC as making one harder to hit, vs. damage reduction.

Artificial limits on weapon usage--I liked how TFT made iron interfere with the casting of magic (not offering protection from it, though), seemed like a more believable limitation.

Multiple kinds of resolution systems vs a unified system.  It was a hot mess having descending AC, saving throws, thieves' abilities, etc.  It seemed to me that they just wanted to use all the cool dice in multiple ways.

1st ed combat.  Ugh.  I don't think anyone could possibly say they used RAW.

I know this is heresy, but I have never liked random attributes and I especially hate randomized hit points. I would rather have point distribution and a simple number for hit point level increases.

I also don't like Vancian magic.

I'm not necessarily opposed to zero to hero in theory, but I'm just tired of it after playing D&D for years and years.

All of my issues can be fixed pretty easily and are common alternative or house rules.

Quote from: ShieldWife on October 14, 2022, 12:34:37 PM
I know this is heresy, but I have never liked random attributes and I especially hate randomized hit points.

This ain't heresy. That's just a fact many don't wanna hear: random attributes and (specially) HP are trash.

The only way I can even conceive anyone liking random HP is cuz it was that way in D&D from the get go, and once something in early D&D made it to print people just can't let it go. But the idea that one character is specially defined by having exactly one HP more than another due to random chance, and that this is something that should be preserved, is absurd.

Attributes are real defining character traits. HP are simply derived stats. Derived stats shouldn't be random, they should be based on attributes and/or other stats (like Character Level), cuz they're derivative. Random attributes suck as well, but at least they're more justifiable, in that you could argue that some people are stronger or smarter (etc.) than others, and that these differences aren't always balanced IRL. But some people are hardier (i.e. have more HP) than others because their health attribute (Con) is higher and/or cuz their training (Class) made them tougher. Not through random chance that's disassociated from their training or natural abilities.

Quote from: VisionStorm on October 14, 2022, 03:47:07 PM
The only way I can even conceive anyone liking random HP is cuz it was that way in D&D from the get go, and once something in early D&D made it to print people just can't let it go. But the idea that one character is specially defined by having exactly one HP more than another due to random chance, and that this is something that should be preserved, is absurd.

Attributes are real defining character traits. HP are simply derived stats. Derived stats shouldn't be random, they should be based on attributes and/or other stats (like Character Level), cuz they're derivative. Random attributes suck as well, but at least they're more justifiable, in that you could argue that some people are stronger or smarter (etc.) than others, and that these differences aren't always balanced IRL. But some people are hardier (i.e. have more HP) than others because their health attribute (Con) is higher and/or cuz their training (Class) made them tougher. Not through random chance that's disassociated from their training or natural abilities.

You can dislike it all you want.  It's a free world.  Your reasoning is based on a flawed premise, and then compounds it with some unsupported logic.  All you've shown for sure is that your truly don't understand why someone would like it.  When you find yourself saying about someone else that they only like something because of X, there is a really good chance you have no clue what you are talking about.

This is probably not something that can be explained though, only experienced.  Plus, it's coming from a view of games, simulation, fiction, and several other things that are probably not compatible with your perspective.

However, on the off chance that I'm wrong about that, I'll point out that there is a loose correlation in early D&D mechanics that moves back and forth between realistic simulation, game purposes, fantastical simulation, inspiration, and it is not deterministic.  That's why, for example, it's so hard to pin down exactly what Str, Int, Wis, Dex, Con, and Cha represent, in a way that will satisfy all players.  Sure, people can and do come up with an interpretation that they like well enough, if they keep playing at least.  Some of them mistake that for the way everyone else views it, which has been the source of countless arguments since the game was launched. 

I actually prefer my "hit points" random, but not quite so wildly random as they are at low levels in early D&D.  Not speaking for anyone else, I really like players having to deal with whatever the world has handed them before play start, which requires some randomness.  In fact, I prefer that there be more random elements so that it evens out more quickly.  Ability scores at start and then only hit points being random after that is too constrained for my satisfaction. 

Some stuff I've more or less accepted by now

-vancian magic, thematically can be cool but being always so starved for spells and not having enough payoff for what those spells do it's not worth it until higher levels. I'd prefer roll to cast  system.

- armor class is based almost entirely off what you wear, I wish defense was more active like parry, block and dodge. Only makes sense if you consider hit points part of your defense skill but that breaks down when you get hit with things that you can't really defend against.

- hit points, see above. Characters end up too hard to take down as they level. Toss a grenade in a closed room you should have chunky salsa not hit point damage

Randomized character generation is definitely not an indicator of particularly well-tuned game design, even if the result might be desirable from other perspectives (e.g. verisimilitude, variety, etc).

Quote from: Ocule on October 14, 2022, 04:23:19 PM
Some stuff I've more or less accepted by now

-vancian magic, thematically can be cool but being always so starved for spells and not having enough payoff for what those spells do it's not worth it until higher levels. I'd prefer roll to cast  system.

- armor class is based almost entirely off what you wear, I wish defense was more active like parry, block and dodge. Only makes sense if you consider hit points part of your defense skill but that breaks down when you get hit with things that you can't really defend against.

- hit points, see above. Characters end up too hard to take down as they level. Toss a grenade in a closed room you should have chunky salsa not hit point damage

Sounds like you should give Palladium Fantasy a try. 

Or my new favorite.  Dungeons and Delvers Dice Pool Edition. 

Palladium uses strike vs parry/dodge in an opposed roll.  Armor rating exists, but that only affects damage.  Magic uses mana points to cast, called potential psychic energy (PPE).  Classes are also more diverse with no such thing as a fighter.  Instead there are mercs, soldiers, archers, and knights.   

Delvers is more traditional and still uses armor class, called defense values.  You just get three of them and they're not based on your choice of armor.  They're from your stats, and are Block, Dodge, and Willpower.  No savings throws, and hit points do go up as you level only a bit.  Magic is a skill roll just like attacking with a sword, or sifting through a library to find information.  A stat dice + skill dice + any dice from many talents, pick the best two dice to add up to be a target number or defense number. 

Palladium is more crunchy.  If you start with fantasy you can then expand out to other genres.  D&D:DPE is much more rules lite and is my new favorite OSR game. 

If you want to stick to traditional D&D style rules, then Star Adventurer is a good choice for Star Wars.  It's still random stats and Armor Class is based on what you wear, but it's got low hit points and mystic powers are skill checks. 

Quote from: weirdguy564 on October 14, 2022, 06:09:00 PM

Quote from: Ocule on October 14, 2022, 04:23:19 PM
Some stuff I've more or less accepted by now

-vancian magic, thematically can be cool but being always so starved for spells and not having enough payoff for what those spells do it's not worth it until higher levels. I'd prefer roll to cast  system.

- armor class is based almost entirely off what you wear, I wish defense was more active like parry, block and dodge. Only makes sense if you consider hit points part of your defense skill but that breaks down when you get hit with things that you can't really defend against.

- hit points, see above. Characters end up too hard to take down as they level. Toss a grenade in a closed room you should have chunky salsa not hit point damage

Sounds like you should give Palladium Fantasy a try. 

Or my new favorite.  Dungeons and Delvers Dice Pool Edition. 

Palladium uses strike vs parry/dodge in an opposed roll.  Armor rating exists, but that only affects damage.  Magic uses mana points to cast, called potential psychic energy (PPE).  Classes are also more diverse with no such thing as a fighter.  Instead there are mercs, soldiers, archers, and knights.   

Delvers is more traditional and still uses armor class, called defense values.  You just get three of them and they're not based on your choice of armor.  They're from your stats, and are Block, Dodge, and Willpower.  No savings throws, and hit points do go up as you level only a bit.  Magic is a skill roll just like attacking with a sword, or sifting through a library to find information.  A stat dice + skill dice + any dice from many talents, pick the best two dice to add up to be a target number or defense number. 

Palladium is more crunchy.  If you start with fantasy you can then expand out to other genres.  D&D:DPE is much more rules lite and is my new favorite OSR game. 

If you want to stick to traditional D&D style rules, then Star Adventurer is a good choice for Star Wars.  It's still random stats and Armor Class is based on what you wear, but it's got low hit points and mystic powers are skill checks.

Ive heard palladium is a nightmare to actually play, but ive never actually played it. Dungeons and Delvers sounds interesting as a core game though its probably strictly fantasy from the sound of it.

Not sure what D&D: DPE is. Star Adventurer looked awesome but missing things like npcs, monsters and and stat blocks. I do like how it handles classes

Quote from: Ocule on October 14, 2022, 11:29:40 PM
Ive heard palladium is a nightmare to actually play, but ive never actually played it.

If you can play AD&D you can play Palladium Fantasy. My personal recommendation is pick up the first edition rather than second edition as everything is less complicated (it was before many of the things that actually make Palladium difficult to run were implemented).

Combat is opposed d20 rolls and, in 1e, warriors have a distinct advantage over non-warriors with their free parry (those without hand to hand training have to spend actions to parry attacks) and hand to hand and weapon proficiency bonuses (the fact that stat bonuses only come in at 16 or higher typically mean that your actual training matters way more than your attributes do; and if you do get something high enough, it's a nice advantage without typically being overwhelming).

Skills are percentiles (with the understanding that you only roll them if you're doing something hard enough to possibly fail).

1e has a number of very of distinct magic systems (2e unified everything into running on Potential Psychic Energy like their main flagship at the time of 2e; Rifts) that actually feel very different from each other.

Beyond that, it's basically just a matter of GM rulings when needed, typically involving either d20 checks for combat or percentiles for non-combat.

Quote from: Chris24601 on October 15, 2022, 12:11:48 AM

Quote from: Ocule on October 14, 2022, 11:29:40 PM
Ive heard palladium is a nightmare to actually play, but ive never actually played it.

If you can play AD&D you can play Palladium Fantasy. ...

I ran a lot of Palladium Fantasy back in the day.  It's way worse to run that B/X, but as you say probably only slightly worse than 1e btb (but did any of us actually play 1e btb?).  There are more dice, and it's slower, but it's not quite *painfully* slow.  There are more fiddly bits to keep track of, but once you work out a bookkeeping procedure and get it ingrained in your brain, it's not terrible.

It was when Rifts came out, with MD and more rules and taking 100 years to create a character and all that, that I got frustrated with the system.  Don't get me wrong, I think Rifts as a setting is ABSOLUTELY AMAZING and one of my very favorites, but it's just so slow to run.  Oof.

Also, Beyond the Supernatural.  Amazing setting.  All their settings are amazing.  I just wish the rules were 33%-50% less heavy.

Quote from: Chris24601 on October 15, 2022, 12:11:48 AM

Quote from: Ocule on October 14, 2022, 11:29:40 PM
Ive heard palladium is a nightmare to actually play, but ive never actually played it.

If you can play AD&D you can play Palladium Fantasy. My personal recommendation is pick up the first edition rather than second edition as everything is less complicated (it was before many of the things that actually make Palladium difficult to run were implemented).

Combat is opposed d20 rolls and, in 1e, warriors have a distinct advantage over non-warriors with their free parry (those without hand to hand training have to spend actions to parry attacks) and hand to hand and weapon proficiency bonuses (the fact that stat bonuses only come in at 16 or higher typically mean that your actual training matters way more than your attributes do; and if you do get something high enough, it's a nice advantage without typically being overwhelming).

Skills are percentiles (with the understanding that you only roll them if you're doing something hard enough to possibly fail).

1e has a number of very of distinct magic systems (2e unified everything into running on Potential Psychic Energy like their main flagship at the time of 2e; Rifts) that actually feel very different from each other.

Beyond that, it's basically just a matter of GM rulings when needed, typically involving either d20 checks for combat or percentiles for non-combat.

I agree.  1st edition is not complex like later games.  It's actually quite a stable game and I prefer it to 2nd edition, and would use it to learn how to play Palladium system. 

One thing that's different between 1E and 2E is magic.  1E restricts wizards with x-spells-per-day.  2E uses magic power points to be compatible with all other newer games they make.