D&D 1E The indispensible 1e

[tlantl]

I love 1E, but are people seriously nostalgic for weapon speed factors and weapon vs. AC adjustments? They were one of the first things we ditched for over-complicating the combat system.

I don't think nostalgic is the right term for it.

In games where first strike ability could determine the outcome of the entire engagement weapon speeds made a difference, especially when casting times determined which spells a wizard or cleric was going to use first.

Once upon a time the dagger was a choice weapon. It was fast and dangerous. You could often beat an enemy spell caster in initiative with them and ruin his whole day, maybe even kill him outright. You could throw two daggers in a round, this gives you 2-8 points of damage before you add strength an magic to the damage. On a surprise that caster was usually a dead body. Remember we used to roll hit points. Casters often had very few hit points ever. ( 11d4 + con ) Wizards never had good constitutions they needed high scores in intelligence and dexterity first. Bonuses for high scores were pretty paltry too.

As for weapon vs armor type, I have to agree but because the numbers don't make a lot of sense. Why would a footman's flail be more effective against platemail than against a naked man?

 

[Neonchameleon]

The problem with weapon speed factors is that they are quite blatantly unrealistic to the point of being almost exactly backwards. I've no problem with the idea of weapon speed factors - but the pike should be faster than the halberd should be faster than the longsword, faster than the dagger - with the fist being slowest of all. You need to move your wrist slightly to move the head of a halberd a foot - but to move your fist a foot you need to move your whole arm that much.

You choose a dagger because it's more concealable and throwable and a longsword so you can also use a shield. And melee should be faster than range.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Weapon speeds, yes, they were mostly a good idea. They actually gave a reason why some folks might choose a smaller, lighter weapon like a dagger instead of always grabbing for a two-handed sword.

Vs. AC adjustments were a little too fiddly for my tastes.

Weapon speed rarely comes up, anyway, so it's really a non-issue.

 

[Howndawg]

Rangers with high intelligence and druids with high charisma.
Illusionists.
Fat clerics and skinny thieves.
Fat halflings and skinny elves.
No assumed pantheon of gods.
The very word Dweomer.
Voulges, partizans, ranseurs, spetums, and glaive-guisarmes.

 

[DMKastmaria]

As for weapon vs armor type, I have to agree but because the numbers don't make a lot of sense. Why would a footman's flail be more effective against platemail than against a naked man?

It's not more effective, due to the AC difference between Plate mail (3) and Naked (10). The +2 bonus to hit plate, is because the f. flail supposedly negates or bypasses certain characteristics of Plate mail, which normally grant added protection.

The -1 against a naked man... I can only assume GG's research lead him to believe that the relative freedom of movement, would grant a smidgen of extra protection, above a mere AC 10, against said flail.

I wonder if the footman's flail has a bonus against plate, due to its wearer's max agility, as well. Per GG's own words, he did figure such factors into the AC system.

I've never used the table, myself, though one day I probably will. It's not a feature of OSRIC, which is what I'm currently running.

 

[Roland55]

I only played a little bit of 1E. But for me, I enjoyed the sense of wonder at everything. Magic was weird and powerful, monsters were potent, and exploring ruins and caves felt truly dangerous.

"...felt truly dangerous."

Yes. This.

Paradoxically, the difficulty involved in keeping your character running kept me around the game long enough to be addicted. The game was clearly different from everything else I had ever played, and its very oddness ... its peculiarity ... and the designers' wit ... kept me coming back to the gaming table.

That, and the fact that I could actually game with someone else, besides my group of hard-core wargamers.

It sure couldn't have been THACO.

 

[Toric_Arthendain]

The reprinted 1E DMG was Easley (as was the 2E DMG), not Otis. Otis did do the covers for the Moldvay/Cook B/X covers of the D&D boxed set.

For a long time, I didn't like Otis's work - something looked wrong or unreal about it, and I much preferred realistic-looking artwork; something you felt you could actually step into, that the fantasy was real (works like Parkinson, Easley, Elmore, etc.). However, I've come to appreciate Otis's work.

Erol Otus is my absolute favorite D&D artist. I love Jeff Dee, Trampier, and Sutherland III as well, but there is something about Otus that defines D&D for me visually. The otherworldly feel of his work helps with immersion and his pieces are so evocative. He will be at NTRPGCon in Texas at the beginning of June and I am signed up for three games as a player that Erol will also be playing in. Can't wait to sit at the same gaming table with him!

As for my opinion on indispensable 1e bits, I hesitate to even reply. I am perfectly happy playing 1e AD&D currently and don't feel the need to look at a new edition. That being said, I think it would be cool if some 1e influences made it into the new edition. So many things have already been mentioned that I whole-heartedly agree with.

My list would include:

Quick (15 or 20 minutes) character creation, elimination of the need for planning out a character progression to endgame. No skills or at least an option to play the game without skills. Secondary skills as an alternative.

Players don't need to know all the rules to begin play.

Magic Items should be in the DMG, and shouldn't be so easy to create.

Initiative rolled every round. One minute rounds, which I believe better serve the abstract nature of D&D combat.

Small stat blocks. Orc, AC 6, 7 hp, 1-6 dmg. That is sufficient for most mundane monsters for me.

Adventures that focus more on sandbox style gaming, and that have short backgrounds of a paragraph or three and then throw you into the action with lots of room for DM interpretation and improvisation. No more wordy backgrounds that read more like someone's fantasy novel adapted to a D&D adventure.

As so many have mentioned, magic that has consequences and can often be dangerous. Fireball filling volume, Haste aging the recipients of the spell, etc. Also, the need for at least four hours rest to regain the simplest spells and 15 minutes per spell level to memorize so that a 9th level spell takes just over two hours to regain. And casting times that make it possible for a spell to be interrupted.

There are many more things I love from 1e that would be cool to see make it into the new edition and most have been mentioned in this thread already. And I realize that for every thread like this one where there is obvious support for 1e concepts, there are threads that discuss not wanting any 1e or 2e influences in the new edition. Even though I don't have any intention of ditching 1e in favor of the new edition, I will be really curious to see how it all turns out.

 

[satori01]

1E did a good job between minimum space to use a weapon, weapon speed, and the segment system of turn rounds of modeling why it was useful to have multiple weapons of differing sizes. The two handed sword might be great against the dinosaur in the large cave, but you needed something smaller against humanoids in cramp quarters. I played in many a R.A.W 1e campaigns, and often the Minmax build was Field Plate Armour and a high plus dagger to take advantage of Weapon Speed, and Armour vs Weapon adjustments... And do not forget a helm because 1 in 6 attacks hit the head.It was fun, and it was exciting to see if the Magiv Missle was faster than the dagger.


The thing is, almost no one used RAW , especially Gary Gygax.


Weapon vs Armour should stay dead. As should Demi human level limits, sex based attribute limits, race based attribute limits, ( half orcs got hosed).


Most people that played 1e like the design goal of going back to a more direct play style, of say it/ do it and Backgrounds and Themes allowing for a broading of roles for class. Those that played D&D only from 3e on are however scared sh$tless by this same prospect in my experience.

 

[Stormonu]

Hmmm. No one's mentioned the different damages of S-M and L. I suppose no one thinks it's worth carrying to 5E (I don't)?

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Weapon speed rarely comes up, anyway, so it's really a non-issue.

Must... resist... rant... on why... WSF are so... abysmal... [/Kirk]