Happy Birthday to our Newest Member!

[calithena]

Mike Mearls, a game designer of not inconsiderable repute - welcome to the boards!

Just remember - your AD&D1 love may get you some cred at new-school forums like Dragonsfoot and the Knights & Knaves Alehouse, but here it's all about the old old school, boy-ee! We prefer photocopied, stapled rules with parchment covers where possible.

Nonetheless, it's great to have you here!

[Zulgyan]

Welcome to the boards mike!

I hope you learn something about game design! We are willing to teach you how D&D is done right! ;D









(He's obviously not Mearls)

[korgoth]

Looks like he's also our newest member.

Congrats on the b-day! Hope this site makes your day.

[mearls]

Greetings all! I hope to learn a bit about OD&D from this site and as I run my OD&D game at work on Fridays.

Yup, that's right. At WotC we're playing OD&D. I read Jeff Rients' report of his Winter War OD&D game, and I had to run the game. I'm working on my dungeon right now. None of this computer and typing stuff - everything is in a hardcover, artist's sketchbook I've had lying around for a while.

Anyway, thanks for the welcome!

[Zulgyan]

I still believe this guy is not really mearls but an impostor.

I hope I get proved wrong.

Anyway, whether you are, or are not the real mearls, have a welcome SMITE!

;D

(pls, to be taken with total humor, just playing and having fun. mearls is a nice guy)

[korgoth]

mearls said:

Greetings all! I hope to learn a bit about OD&D from this site and as I run my OD&D game at work on Fridays.

Great! I especially like hearing about people's house rules and adjudications, so it would be fun to hear how you decide to run it.

[Zulgyan]

Mike, a couple questions.

Which are the old-school influences, if any, in the new D&D?

Have you drawn ideas and concepts from older editions?

How do you regard old editions of D&D?

[mearls]

korgoth said:

Great! I especially like hearing about people's house rules and adjudications, so it would be fun to hear how you decide to run it.

The first session is mostly by the book, with a house rule I'll have in the back of my mind to use if it comes up. If a player tries an action that has a random chance of success, I assign the task a rating from 3 to 18, just like an ability score.

I then pick an ability score based on the action, compare the two, and roll a die.

If the character's score is 3 or more points higher than the task's rating, success is 5 in 6.

If the score is 3 or more points lower, success is 1 in 6.

Otherwise, success is 3 in 6.

Keep in mind that this rule is only for situations where success is unclear. In most cases, the player's description of the character's actions determines if his efforts are successful or obviously doomed to fail.

[mearls]

zulgyan said:

Mike, a couple questions.

Which are the old-school influences, if any, in the new D&D?

Have you drawn ideas and concepts from older editions?

How do you regard old editions of D&D?

1. I think that the new D&D is very much the product of the edition that immediately preceded it. That said, the DMG encourages more creativity and flexibility in DMs. 3e had a lot of complex systems whose interactions were never clearly explained. Some DMs felt this restricted their ability to alter the rules.

4e tries to reverse that by making the rules transparent, clearly explaining how things work and the relationship between different parts of the game. The biggest throwback, IMO, is the return to an informed DM who can make informed decisions about tinkering with the game.

2. I don't know if there are any mechanical concepts that are directly drawn from earlier versions of the game. 3e was definitely our starting point. However, as I mentioned above I think we have done more to embrace the idea of empowering the DM.

3. I love old versions of D&D, except perhaps for 2e. I've played them all, and would still play them all. I think 4e is my favorite version of D&D (obviously; I work on it) but I quite like 1e and OD&D.

I'd type more, but my laptop battery is about to die....

[Zulgyan]

Thanks for the answers mike.

Now, just what kind of game are will you run?? An old-fashioned dungeon crawl? something else? Keep on the Shadowfell with OD&D rules?

Just tell us, and we'll "help" you out.

EDIT: consider using this replica of the old TSR character sheets for the ultimate OD&D experience - odd74.proboards76.com/index.cgi?board=links&action=display&thread=1189036142

[makofan]

Happy Birthday Mike! And I agree, 2nd edition AD&D is what drove me back to Moldvay/Mentzer.

[mearls]

zulgyan said:

Thanks for the answers mike.

Now, just what kind of game are will you run?? An old-fashioned dungeon crawl? something else? Keep on the Shadowfell with OD&D rules?

I'm building an old fashioned dungeon crawl, using the tables from the AD&D DMG and the encounter tables from the Underworld and Wilderness Adventures. The dice have been cruel to the players so far - I've rolled three level 4 monsters in the first six rooms.

The dungeon is an ancient, buried palace of the mage emperor Kardallin. His ghost, and the ghosts of his 99 apprentices, still wander the halls, setting traps, summoning monsters, and either mocking or counseling intruders, as appropriate.

[Zulgyan]

Certainly nice theme.

Check out Judges Guild's Ready Ref Sheet for some more crazy random generation.

The "Starling Statues" table should suit well a ruined palace.

[ffilz]

Mike, I like that task roll system. It makes it easy to set tasks of different difficulties and have attributes matter, without making any task automatic or impossible.

Frank

[Zulgyan]

I think it's better to just adjudicate on the fly, with no set universal task resolution system.

But hey, that's me. Other DM's may do what they find right.

[Rhuvein]

Belated Happy Birthday and welcome Mike!