|
Post by Rhuvein on Mar 24, 2008 14:44:47 GMT -6
My name is Scott, and I've posted occasionally on various old-school forums for some time. Hi Scott. Good to see you over here! ;D
|
|
|
Post by driver on Mar 24, 2008 18:32:08 GMT -6
Hi Scott. Good to see you over here! Hey, Rhuvein. Long time no see!
|
|
|
Post by redpriest on Mar 24, 2008 19:21:29 GMT -6
Hi, Rob here, and I started playing wargames at about age 12 in 1971, although I played Hit The Beach and Risk before then. Oh yeah, and played "army" WWII, of course, around the neighborhood. Wasn't introduced to D&D until after a couple of years of college in 1980, and it was Holmes. That only a lasted a month or so before we launched into AD&D. I've played more RPG and board/war games than I can remember, but I always come back to D&D. Always played AD&D right up until just a couple of months before Katrina (you can now guess my neck o' the woods) and then I was fortunate enough to play in an OD&D/Basic game. Katrina busted that up, unfortunately.
There was a stretch from 1995 to 2003 when I took a sabbatical from all forms of gaming, except the usual parlor games.
|
|
|
Post by Ghul on Mar 25, 2008 4:55:18 GMT -6
Hello,
My name is Jeff. I've been lurking around these boards for about 6 months, so I figured maybe I should join as the discussions are very interesting to me.
But I have an admission: I've never actually played OD&D. I began with Holmes D&D in 1981 (as player, and then DM). I moved on to AD&D by 1982 (then the only DM), which I played until 1988. Took a break for a few years until I was invited to play in a game back in 1991. I was shocked when I was told I had to buy a new PHB (2nd ed) if I wanted to play.
Soon I was with another group and soon after that the reigns of constant DM were (for better or worse) mine again. I took my group from the early 90s all the way to today (literally, as tonight is game night!) from 2E, to 3E, to my present game that is a hybrid of C&C/AD&D: a Greyhawk/Castle Zagyg 576 CY campaign that I began in February 2005.
So, why my interest in this site that focuses on OD&D?
The topic is fascinating to me. True I've never run this rules set, but I've studied it many times over the years (with Supplement I). It is the very core of my favorite game ever invented. Boiled down to its very essence, I envy you purists who still play it and who were there from its inception.
I also like the way the moderator of this site encourages respectfulness and cooperation among its members. He encourages thought-provoking conversation, advises new posters on how to begin, and keeps things calm and balanced. This is a community of fellows I can enjoy talking shop with. I look forward to jumping in on some topics.
Best, --Jeff Talanian
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Mar 25, 2008 7:05:45 GMT -6
Welcome Jeff. I only stated playing OD&D after I found this forum - the enthusiasm encouraged me to try it. It's great!
|
|
|
Post by driver on Mar 25, 2008 9:20:56 GMT -6
I've never played or run OD&D, either. I always kind of assumed it was "unplayable." The fact that it was played by many people for an awfully long time somehow never sank in. :B After actually having *looked* at the game as something other than a precursor to B/X or AD&D, though, I'm now as excited about my upcoming PBP campaign as I've been about a game in a while. I finally get it. I think between OD&D for "traditional" gaming and WFRP 1e for things like the Old World and Harn, I think I can put most of my other gaming books in the garage for a while. I never thought I'd reach a stage where I didn't consider Holmes or AD&D or, hell, Supplement I "old school" enough for my current tastes, but I have.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2008 14:55:54 GMT -6
I look forward to jumping in on some topics. And I look forward to your thoughts. Welcome Jeff!
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 26, 2008 6:43:22 GMT -6
I've never played or run OD&D, either. I always kind of assumed it was "unplayable." The fact that it was played by many people for an awfully long time somehow never sank in. I hear this a lot, and it always makes me chuckle. I mean, by the time OD&D first came out (1974) it had been playtested for several years as it evolved from Chainmail (at least 1971) with its fantasy supplement. OD&D was just a natural evolution from that, and probably AD&D was a natural evolution from combining the boxed set with the supplements. I got into a mild argument once with a guy on the Mongoose boards who kept telling me that OD&D was "broken" and was unplayable and I just couldn't get it through his skull that not only was it not broken but I play it just fine. I'm not sure where that "unplayable" thing ever got started, but it's really hard to counter since so many gamers either haven't seen the OD&D rules or have no desire to read them.
|
|
Arminath
Level 4 Theurgist
WoO:CR
Posts: 150
|
Post by Arminath on Mar 26, 2008 7:22:29 GMT -6
I've never played or run OD&D, either. I always kind of assumed it was "unplayable." The fact that it was played by many people for an awfully long time somehow never sank in. I hear this a lot, and it always makes me chuckle. I mean, by the time OD&D first came out (1974) it had been playtested for several years as it evolved from Chainmail (at least 1971) with its fantasy supplement. OD&D was just a natural evolution from that, and probably AD&D was a natural evolution from combining the boxed set with the supplements. I got into a mild argument once with a guy on the Mongoose boards who kept telling me that OD&D was "broken" and was unplayable and I just couldn't get it through his skull that not only was it not broken but I play it just fine. I'm not sure where that "unplayable" thing ever got started, but it's really hard to counter since so many gamers either haven't seen the OD&D rules or have no desire to read them. Alot of 'modern' players equate a small page count with not enough rules to play 'correctly'. Since each evolution of the game has more rules, they incorrectly assume it is better. Oh, Hi everyone, I joined a month ago and I'm liking what I see here.
|
|
|
Post by Ghul on Mar 26, 2008 8:14:56 GMT -6
I've never played or run OD&D, either. I always kind of assumed it was "unplayable." The fact that it was played by many people for an awfully long time somehow never sank in. I hear this a lot, and it always makes me chuckle. I mean, by the time OD&D first came out (1974) it had been playtested for several years as it evolved from Chainmail (at least 1971) with its fantasy supplement. OD&D was just a natural evolution from that, and probably AD&D was a natural evolution from combining the boxed set with the supplements. I got into a mild argument once with a guy on the Mongoose boards who kept telling me that OD&D was "broken" and was unplayable and I just couldn't get it through his skull that not only was it not broken but I play it just fine. I'm not sure where that "unplayable" thing ever got started, but it's really hard to counter since so many gamers either haven't seen the OD&D rules or have no desire to read them. Absolutely. It enjoyed considerably more playtest than a lot of RPGs do today. Gary drew his first Greyhawk subterranean dungeon map in autumn of 1972. Here is a snippet from a forthcoming Crusader article that Gary and I wrote together just a few short weeks before he passed: ...The map was drawn to test the initial prototype of the Dungeons & Dragons game (published January, 1974), which was based on the Chainmail "Man-to-Man" rules and the "Fantasy Supplement" to it in which the players selected various figures for tabletop combat—Heroes, Superheroes, Wizards, normal soldiers of various sorts, humanoids, and monsters. Play in the new fantasy game involved creating a character that was a fighter, magician, or cleric and then having them engage the exploration of a subterranean dungeon in which lurked monsters, and where there were traps for the unwary. The above will be appearing in issue #9 of Crusader . There is no doubt that the original Dungeons & Dragons game was tested significantly by its primary author and its initial players.
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Mar 26, 2008 10:18:21 GMT -6
The brokeness of OD&D comes from a few things:
First, the rules ARE confusing. Combine that with an entirely new type of game and of course people struggled with it. Armed with newer rules sets and an ability to easily chat with the original designers, we have come to a better understanding of the rules.
Second, the game was perhaps not really complete in the box. It referenced Chainmail. And I think we now understand Chainmail does help understand the rules, even to some extent the alternate combat system.
Third, once the idea of role playing developed, people started to think about different ways to play and different genres. And since obviously some people's desires did not fit OD&D, they feel OD&D didn't work (and perhaps promised it would and didn't live up to that promise).
And then to top off the cake, we have folks who have only been exposed to newer games, who are making judgements based on bits and pieces they've heard, plus the fact that the game went through so many revisions and editions, and it's only natural to assume something was wrong with the original.
Frank
|
|
|
Post by castiglione on Mar 27, 2008 21:11:15 GMT -6
Hi - just registered although I've been lurking for some time.
Got my start role-playing in grade school; one of the "big" kids was running a game using the little brown books. I later moved on to other RPG's but I've always been fascinated by the one that started it all.
Cheers.
|
|
busman
Level 6 Magician
Playing OD&D, once again. Since 2008!
Posts: 448
|
Post by busman on Mar 27, 2008 21:42:44 GMT -6
I was turned onto this site by grodog (Thanks Allan!).
I started with the White Box in, I think, '77 or '78. I would have been 8 or 9 back then. I haven't confirmed this yet, but I'm fairly sure my father (who is from the Twin Cities) picked up the Box while back home and dropped it in the "games closet". My brother and I were already heavily into wargaming back then having fought the entire North Africa campaign at a squad and tank level. The CRTs in Men & Magic seemed very familiar at first blush...
I couldn't predict then what a life changing event that decision by my father was.
We played the heck out of the white box, found out there was a new monster manual, but it was Advanced! We added in the monsters and played more. After a year or two, we moved over to AD&D and played the heck out of that until 2nd ed came out. Then things just didn't seem to make as much sense, my brother moved went to college. I finished out HS with my gaming group playing AD&D still, not really moving to 2e. At college I never really found an active D&D group, we did lots of gaming just not D&D.
With my college group, I started going to all of the Strategicon's 3 times a year for the next 10-15 years, where I'd get in a group in each con, but otherwise no regular group. Kept up with the rules when 3.0 came out, but it felt even further away. I didn't bother picking up the 3.5 books from what I read.
5 years or so ago, I jumped in on The Acaeum, but let things fall by the wayside as my kids were born. About 7 months ago, after reading about the upcoming 4e (feels much more like OD&D than anything in a VERY long time), as I was going through some boxes, I pulled out my white box and decided to read through them. THIS was D&D. I really remembered why I loved D&D in the first place and what a real pleasure this game could be.
Now I just need to find a good group to play with. In the meantime I've been enjoying reading through the boards here for the last couple of weeks.
My side project has also been divining the fonts and layouts of the white box books (and maybe then onto the Supplements). I'm nearly 100% on Men & Magic 6th edition. When I get to 100%, I'll make a post here and cross to Tome of Treasures and/or Dragonsfoot and/or Acaeum.
I'm looking forward to continue being a member here, Chris
|
|
Arminath
Level 4 Theurgist
WoO:CR
Posts: 150
|
Post by Arminath on Mar 29, 2008 15:33:39 GMT -6
About 7 months ago, after reading about the upcoming 4e (feels much more like OD&D than anything in a VERY long time) I think I just heard one of those things in life that you just can't wrap your brain around and make sense out of...did I really hear that right, cause now I'm curious.
|
|
|
Post by James Maliszewski on Mar 29, 2008 15:37:55 GMT -6
I think I just heard one of those things in life that you just can't wrap your brain around and make sense out of...did I really hear that right, cause now I'm curious. Yes, you did. I've heard various people make the same claim from time to time, but I never believed them either.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Mar 29, 2008 16:10:58 GMT -6
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....
*ears prick up*
Huh? Whazzat?
Okay, now I'm interested. Would somebody care to elaborate?
Doc
|
|
|
Post by redpriest on Mar 29, 2008 20:21:01 GMT -6
About 7 months ago, after reading about the upcoming 4e (feels much more like OD&D than anything in a VERY long time) I think I just heard one of those things in life that you just can't wrap your brain around and make sense out of...did I really hear that right, cause now I'm curious. Sorry, I have to raise 3.5 and 4e to address the discussion. If Fin doesn't want that in this thread, then I totally understand and wouldn't cast a single glance if this entire post were deleted. I played in a 4e demo game this past week, and I wouldn't say that it feels like OD&D at all. What I can say about it is that combat has been greatly streamlined and plays much, much faster than 3.5. That's a good thing, IMO. This edition still has got a bazillion skills, lots of races and lots of classes. Every single character has powers usable every single round and many powers usable in every single encounter. Yes, and every character can heal themselves at least 6 or so times every single day. Also, just as in 3.x, the rules try to cover every situation. Except for a relatively fast and simple combat system, I can't wrap my head around it being very much OD&D-like. With a lot of work, maybe, like throwing out every single skill and removing at least 95% of the powers and totally removing just about every other rule, then you may be headed in the right direction. By the time you did all that, you just may as well have started with little brown books volumes I, II and III or an AD&D player's handbook.
|
|
busman
Level 6 Magician
Playing OD&D, once again. Since 2008!
Posts: 448
|
Post by busman on Mar 30, 2008 2:55:37 GMT -6
I think I just heard one of those things in life that you just can't wrap your brain around and make sense out of...did I really hear that right, cause now I'm curious. Sorry, I have to raise 3.5 and 4e to address the discussion. If Fin doesn't want that in this thread, then I totally understand and wouldn't cast a single glance if this entire post were deleted. I played in a 4e demo game this past week, and I wouldn't say that it feels like OD&D at all. What I can say about it is that combat has been greatly streamlined and plays much, much faster than 3.5. That's a good thing, IMO. This edition still has got a bazillion skills, lots of races and lots of classes. Every single character has powers usable every single round and many powers usable in every single encounter. Yes, and every character can heal themselves at least 6 or so times every single day. Also, just as in 3.x, the rules try to cover every situation. Except for a relatively fast and simple combat system, I can't wrap my head around it being very much OD&D-like. With a lot of work, maybe, like throwing out every single skill and removing at least 95% of the powers and totally removing just about every other rule, then you may be headed in the right direction. By the time you did all that, you just may as well have started with little brown books volumes I, II and III or an AD&D player's handbook. Please note I never said that 4th felt like OD&D. I said it felt MORE like OD&D than anything else in a long time. I'm not being pedantic here, I chose those words for a good reason. I was comparing 4th to everything since AD&D in comparison to OD&D. caveat: I haven't played 4e, I've only read (nearly everything) about it, thus far. There seems to be much more reliance on DMs making calls and the players just doing stuff, rather than playing chess. There seems to be a HUGE effort by the WotC folks to get DMs and Players noses out of the books and spending full-time jobs worth of effort preparing characters and encounters/monsters and just get playing. I'm not sure if you've had a chance to sit down and read the Wizard's Presents books at all, but you can hear the designers screaming OLD SCHOOL throughout. That said, no chance is 4e = OD&D. None. But reading about 4e gave me the feelings I had back when I was playing OD&D and got me breaking out my OD&D stuff again, which is what eventually got me to here, which was my point for including it (also, I don't think I'm alone in this, judging from Mearls' presence here, etc.). So let's all put down our Shields of New Edition Protection and Swords of Munchkin Slaying +1 (+3 vs. Powergamers) and get back to introductions and talking about OD&D.
|
|
|
Post by driver on Mar 30, 2008 6:04:10 GMT -6
I believe I'll keep my Shield of New Edition Protection. One never knows.
|
|
|
Post by James Maliszewski on Mar 30, 2008 7:43:12 GMT -6
I'm not sure if you've had a chance to sit down and read the Wizard's Presents books at all, but you can hear the designers screaming OLD SCHOOL throughout. I guess this all comes down to personal preferences and interpretation, because I saw little to nothing that suggested old school play in the WotC Presents books. Mike Mearls had never even played OD&D until recently and I'd bet good money that that's true of most of the design team (Rob Heinsoo being the only exception I know of). I'll be happily surprised if 4e gives the DM more discretionary authority within the game, but that seems unlikely. Far more probable is that the DM's role has been further emasculated in the name of "ease of play," a trend that's been building for years now. I'll be keeping my shield and sword ready, just in case.
|
|
|
Post by driver on Mar 30, 2008 8:05:20 GMT -6
Current country music artists name-check Merle Haggard on a regular basis, too, but it doesn't mean we're going to hear anything that sounds like Merle on FM radio.
|
|
|
Post by James Maliszewski on Mar 30, 2008 8:11:42 GMT -6
Current country music artists name-check Merle Haggard on a regular basis, too, but it doesn't mean we're going to hear anything that sounds like Merle on FM radio. Indeed. I think, particularly with the death of Gary, there will be lots of ritual invocation of the Dungeon Master's name out of genuine respect for the hobby he helped create for us all to enjoy all these years. But the reality is that mass market gaming has moved very far from its Gygaxian roots. Whether that's a good or a bad thing I leave as an exercise to the individual reader. With rare exceptions, I doubt we'll ever see a game even as old school as late 1e (which isn't very old school in my opinion) published anymore.
|
|
|
Post by redpriest on Mar 30, 2008 12:12:36 GMT -6
So let's all put down our Shields of New Edition Protection and Swords of Munchkin Slaying +1 (+3 vs. Powergamers) and get back to introductions and talking about OD&D. No shield here, busman. In fact, I actually enjoyed playing the 4e game the other night, but didn't think that little tidbit was necessary for my point. Anyway, I'm out of the 4e discussion now and off to finish preparing my OD&D game for CoastCon (which is in just 2 weeks. Yikes!!). A point was raised and I just gave my opine.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarn on Apr 13, 2008 17:02:11 GMT -6
Heh, I never expected to see a 4E discussion when I popped into the introductions thread!
Hello all. I've been reading this forum since it was started and love the perspectives you all have on the game. I finally registered myself, but don't know how much I'll contribute directly since I don't own OD&D and have never had the opportunity to play it.
I started with AD&D in the 80's, but have since collected every edition of the game* except, regrettably the original. Nonetheless, I enjoy reading the discussions here and find they offer great ideas, advice and wisdom applicable to any edition, and usually to RPGs in general.
*yes, I bought (and have since sold) 3E, but never "upgraded" to 3.5.
|
|
|
Post by driver on Apr 14, 2008 6:44:09 GMT -6
Welcome aboard, blackbarn! Entry into the OD&D ruleset is about as cheap as gaming gets now that the .pdf's are legal. If you take a DIY approach, you can have a complete game for $5, some toner, and some time spent kitbashing. The last bit is the best part. The major thing I've taken away from my short time with OD&D is a recommitment to the DIY gaming ethic. Once I have a solid ruleset, it's more fun and less work for me to develop things myself rather than having someone else do it. I honestly don't see any reason to spend any money on gaming at this point, unless I start painting minis again. Even if I mess around with 4e, I'll use the free SRD once it goes live. Gygax obviously made good use of a library card and extensive notes, no reason I can't do the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by tavis on Apr 18, 2008 16:42:44 GMT -6
I started playing in 1980 or 1981, when I was 10. My mom saw a newspaper article in our small-town paper about local kids playing Dungeons and Dragons (they had a picture of them dressed up like wizards walking through the woods, as I recall) and bought me a copy of the Holmes set. I still have it, with her increasingly frustrated notes in the margins as she tried to figure it out!
After playing AD&D plus Gamma World and Call of Cthulu through middle school, my gaming mostly petered out (although in high school I ran some memorable AD&D games one-on-one with my friend Brian Stith, in which he played a magic-user/thief in Lankhmar). I got involved in RPGs again when I lived in Chicago in '94 (running a GURPS Lankhmar game, and playing in an Ars Magica game) and LA for a number of years around '95 (playing Call of Cthulu and Ars Magica again). I was really impressed by Ars Magica's noun-verb system for spellcasting - this was the first sense I'd had of a RPG mechanic that wasn't just simulation (which GURPS did 'better' in some sense than AD&D), but really created a feedback loop between the choices you made in creating your character and the way their actions would define them in the game.
I got back into D&D after hearing that Jonathan Tweet was one of the designers of 3rd Edition. I did then & still do love 3E - I appreciate its devotion to tradition (like using as the sample dungeon in the DMG the one Gygax created for AD&D DMG). And throughout my 'modern' phase of playing, studying, and writing for d20-era stuff, I've always been interested in going back to the classics; one of the first 3E campaigns I ran started with Holmes' Zenopus's Tower, and another riffed off the WoG folio.
Only recently have I started appreciating what OD&D has to offer in itself (and why its distinctions from AD&D matter). I was led to this board by Mike Mearls' AP thread, and am grateful to have found such a great resource for decoding these ancient text & unlocking the awesomeness inside!
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Apr 18, 2008 18:50:39 GMT -6
Welcome - all editions have something to offer; hopefully we can all behave here and discuss what OD&D offers! I discovered it just last year and I went from skeptic to converted after trying it!
|
|
|
Post by murquhart72 on Apr 18, 2008 19:05:29 GMT -6
Sorry, I have to raise 3.5 and 4e to address the discussion. If Fin doesn't want that in this thread, then I totally understand and wouldn't cast a single glance if this entire post were deleted. I played in a 4e demo game this past week, and I wouldn't say that it feels like OD&D at all. What I can say about it is that combat has been greatly streamlined and plays much, much faster than 3.5. That's a good thing, IMO. This edition still has got a bazillion skills, lots of races and lots of classes. Every single character has powers usable every single round and many powers usable in every single encounter. Yes, and every character can heal themselves at least 6 or so times every single day. Also, just as in 3.x, the rules try to cover every situation. Except for a relatively fast and simple combat system, I can't wrap my head around it being very much OD&D-like. With a lot of work, maybe, like throwing out every single skill and removing at least 95% of the powers and totally removing just about every other rule, then you may be headed in the right direction. By the time you did all that, you just may as well have started with little brown books volumes I, II and III or an AD&D player's handbook. Thank you for posting this. I'd hate to think here we'd be all "anti-WotC" like "some other sites". It's good to hear that I should stick with OD&D. I was thinking of trying D&D 4E out, but it's expensive and obviously not in our best interests. Good to know!
|
|
|
Post by greyharp on Apr 19, 2008 6:38:51 GMT -6
Another newbie here. I started back in 1980 with the Holmes rulebook , B2, a set of dice and a crayon in a plastic bag, bought for me on my 13th birthday. I was still trying to work out the rules when shortly afterwards I got the 1e hard backs and fell in love.
I basically didn't play for around 10 years in my 20's, but came back to gaming in my early 30's, when I had a small taste of 2e and 3e (the only gaming group I could find). I moved to an isolated rural area five years ago and became good friends with the family down the road. They have seven kids and my brain said "instant gaming group". A few years down the track and I introduced them to 1e and now we play every saturday.
Right from my first taste of D&D in the early 80's, my dream was to get hold of the OD&D books, which I managed to do last year. Now I'm looking forward to years of role playing and introducing the group to OD&D, Holmes and some of the retro-clones.
I love the passion that seems to be growing in the online rpg community for the older versions of D&D.
|
|
|
Post by gleemaxjr on Apr 19, 2008 7:40:44 GMT -6
Hello. I may not be as old as many of you, but I have complete collection of OD&D (just filling in various print gaps; I do have the 4th Print and all the supplements, including Swords and Spells) and some other early TSR/Guidon Games items (in addition to a few Wee Warriors and non-TSR stuff), and am slowly getting back to using it. What I have played has been very fun, and very freeing.
The screen name is a joke, so don't be offended by it.
|
|