|
|
Post by dukeofchutney on Dec 7, 2022 16:44:51 GMT -6
I reading the DMG at the moment for the first time. I do like Gygaxs writing style and Im not sure its is as tied to its tournament reputation as I had heard. It feels like the rambling ideas of an old wargamer. As a player I mostly play in a 2E campaign so i will die on a hill for my summary of that, the others are mostly a jest.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Dec 7, 2022 18:22:58 GMT -6
Holmes is a time machine for crusty old dudes who like fiddling with dex for initiative. Guilty!  |
|
|
|
Post by jamesmishler on Dec 7, 2022 18:23:26 GMT -6
2E is for those whose taste in fantasy was vomited out the 99p bin of fanfiction books. This, while stated in jest, is more true than you might think. Modern fantasy fiction, the whole market, was born out of the Dragonlance books. Seriously, look it up. While there are some authors out there who had a solid series or some best selling one shots, the modern fantasy fiction market was formed in the aftermath of the incredible success of the Dragonlance trilogies. The explosion of fantasy novels that followed transformed what had been a moribund half of the science fiction section into its own section. And a lot of those books were asked on the author's gaming experience or tropes that were developed through the lens of the D&D fantasy experience. The modern fantasy novel Party of Adventurers owes far more to those of D&D than the Fellowship of the Ring (and the two, though there are similarities, are very different creatures). This trend in fantasy fiction spurred by Dragonlance then fed back in to 2nd Edition. Styles especially, and to a lesser extent in the rules (certain changes were made to fit the needs of shoehorning in to modern fiction), but most notably, invisibly, and insidiously in the design and writing of the modules and sourcebooks. The first generation of designers at TSR were brought in based on their imagination and ability to design a solid game. The second generation was brought in based on their imagination and, most often, a degree in English. Many were frustrated or wannabe novelists. This shows in the adventure designs of the time, which were designed more to fit a narrative need than present possibilities, and so many 2nd Edition adventures and supplements presented railroads rather than sandboxes. Many chapters were more like cut scenes than adventure possibilities. This was not just the designer's preference, many new players who came in with 2nd Edition kind of expected this, having their first experience with D&D style gaming being the Dragonlance novels and Choose Your Own Adventure or Endless Quest books. Not a wrong way to play, just a different way to play. Not my preference, but I know a lot of people had fun playing that way, so good for them. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Dec 7, 2022 19:30:41 GMT -6
I LOVE reading those books. Oh heck yeah! Some folks point to the disorganization of the 1e DMG as a flaw, that's absolutely a feature. I love finding awesome tidbits surrounded by High Gygaxian. Wonderful books! And now you lost me  I probably read UA once or twice, but not really after that second time when the binding fell completely apart. I didn't really read, use, (or to be honest bother to understand) any of the books except the MM, PHB, DMG, FF, MM2 and the DDG for flavor. If I want newer fangled books, I'll read OSRIC and Monsters of Myth  OA = Oriental Adventures. But, yeah, I reread Unearthed Arcana once in a while too. I'm not saying they are at the level of the holy trilogy (MM, PHB, DMG), but they are still a lot more fun to read than any of the later editions that read like an appliance instruction manual. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Dec 7, 2022 19:54:07 GMT -6
Modern fantasy fiction, the whole market, was born out of the Dragonlance books. That is an overstatement, it had its influence for sure, but Tolkien, more than anyone or thing, birthed the fantasy novel market. GRR Martin's work for example is born more out of history and a reaction against Tolkien than anything to do with DL. Many other popular fantasy authors had different influences as well. 2nd Edition was the Golden Era of Settings Darksun was inspired by Edgar Rice Burroughs. Birthright was a D&D version of Pendragon. Planescape was, well, it was kind of weird and wonderful. Ravenloft is Vampire the Masquerade for D&D. And so on. As a business model and a perversion of what Adventure Modules were, Dragonlance kind of skewed everything from TSR thereafter. The fantasy novel section of bookstores though? That's Tolkien. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2022 19:55:17 GMT -6
I do a write in vote for 2e - Dark Sun, Ravensloft (though also 1e), kits. Score as a fraction of support.  |
|
|
|
Post by jamesmishler on Dec 7, 2022 20:49:57 GMT -6
Modern fantasy fiction, the whole market, was born out of the Dragonlance books. That is an overstatement, it had its influence for sure, but Tolkien, more than anyone or thing, birthed the fantasy novel market. GRR Martin's work for example is born more out of history and a reaction against Tolkien than anything to do with DL. Many other popular fantasy authors had different influences as well. As a business model and a perversion of what Adventure Modules were, Dragonlance kind of skewed everything from TSR thereafter. The fantasy novel section of bookstores though? That's Tolkien. You are misunderstanding the time frame referent, "Modern." Actually, in the US, it was Howard who created "fantasy" in the form of Swords & Sorcery, as opposed to the Sword & Planet science-fantasy of Burroughs and emulators. But then the popular pulps died out and, and save for the Gnome Press books in the 50s, fantasy was really on the back burner until, yes, in the mid 60s Tolkien's works were published in the US in affordable paperbacks (both pirated and legitimate). Then for a time there was a resurgence in fantasy fiction, including the famous Conan paperbacks, which lasted through about the early 70s. At that point The form had a brief resurgence with injections through Carter's Ballantine series. People shun Carter's own works because they claim he was nothing more than a pastiche writer. But if you look at the new fantasy fiction of the 60s and 70s, it was all some sort of pastiche or counter-pastiche (Moorcock's Elric is nothing more than an anti-Conan, etc.). There were more attempts, mostly very poor, to pastiche Tolkien's works. A lot of it was very bad. There were a few winners there. But by the late 70s and early 80s, by modern standards, the market was moribund. It was on its way out, and was being replaced on shelves by science fiction and Men's Adventure/Action series. And then came Dungeons & Dragons, which inspired a few works here and there. most notably the Thieves World series (inspired by the City State of the Invincible Overlord, itself inspired by Lankhmar, Barsoom, and Hyboria) and the Riftwar Saga(literally the background of the Midkemia D&D campaign setting). Then the Dragonlance novels hit the market like a bomb, creating the "Modern" Fantasy Fiction style/movement. A very different style of novel and market than that of its immediate predecessor. TSR Books literally saved the fantasy fiction section in the bookstores. TSR Books we're, for a time, the major cash cow for TSR. When Random House tried to kill TSR so they could buy it out of bankruptcy, it was not for D&D, it was for TSR Books. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Dec 7, 2022 21:07:06 GMT -6
When Random House tried to kill TSR so they could buy it out of bankruptcy, it was not for D&D, it was for TSR Books. That is an interesting point. I think I read something about that back when WotC bought TSR. How weird would that have been for Random House to own TSR, would they have outsourced the publishing of D&D or just let it go moribund because it wasn't worth the effort? Could have been messy. |
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Dec 7, 2022 21:15:50 GMT -6
I remember how cool the sci-fi/fantasy section of my local Waldenbooks was back in the early 1980s. The sci-fi fantasy section of my local Barnes & Noble today is almost entirely empty of anything that interests me. Only Tolkien and a few Edgar Rice Burroughs books save the fantasy section from being a total loss. And of course, I've read all of those.  |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Dec 7, 2022 21:31:24 GMT -6
I love 1e because it's what I sorta started with, and what I enjoy the most - though nostalgia plays a big part. This is really the secret to the entire question. I think that most of us feel that nostalgia and feel like out first edition is the best. For me, I think back to learning OD&D in a time when everything felt new, my group and I were in high school and so didn't have jobs and girlfriends and the like, and we could spend hours and hours each week playing this amazing game. It probably wouldn't have mattered which edition I had learned from -- those early games were so cool for us because we felt like we were creating something, which I guess we were since we were homebrewing almost everything. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesmishler on Dec 7, 2022 21:56:43 GMT -6
I remember how cool the sci-fi/fantasy section of my local Waldenbooks was back in the early 1980s. The sci-fi fantasy section of my local Barnes & Noble today is almost entirely empty of anything that interests me. Only Tolkien and a few Edgar Rice Burroughs books save the fantasy section from being a total loss. And of course, I've read all of those. Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the modern D&D style gamefic or the postmodern D&D style navel gazing fiction is better. Far from it, in my personal opinion. Most of my book collection is from that 1965 to early 1980s era, and earlier. Good and bad, I think most of it is still head and shoulders above the modern stuff. But enjoyment of fiction, like enjoyment of games, is all relative. If you enjoy it, enjoy it, and don't let anyone tell you you aren't. |
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Dec 8, 2022 1:11:11 GMT -6
You want us to vote on which edition we think is best...on an OD&D forum?!?! Erm, uh...*scratches head* (*doesn't wanna get perma-banned by the Mods*) OD&D!!!How did I do? Can I stay now?  |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Dec 8, 2022 1:23:34 GMT -6
You want us to vote on which edition we think is best...on an OD&D forum?!?! Erm, uh...*scratches head* (*doesn't wanna get perma-banned by the Mods*) OD&D!!!How did I do? Can I stay now? If I posted this on any other forum on the internet it would turn into a flaming heap of garbage and explode. But gamers on this forum are cool. |
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Dec 8, 2022 4:22:50 GMT -6
This is really the secret to the entire question. I think that most of us feel that nostalgia and feel like our first edition is the best. I'm the outlier there. I started with B/X, but never developed any great affection for it - in fact, like many of my peers I dropped it like a hot potato for the "more realistic!" RuneQuest within a year. I only discovered Holmes in 2010, and it (probably together with his magazine articles, it has to be said) led to my D&D renaissance where every other edition had left me cold. So in my case I can objectively say Holmes is best! 😎 |
|
|
|
Post by rredmond on Dec 8, 2022 8:13:07 GMT -6
How did I do? Can I stay now? [takes finger off perma ban button] yer good. |
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Dec 8, 2022 17:49:17 GMT -6
How did I do? Can I stay now? [takes finger off perma ban button] yer good. WHEW! Dat wuz close! |
|
flightcommander
Level 6 Magician
"I become drunk as circumstances dictate."
Posts: 387
|
Post by flightcommander on Dec 9, 2022 0:18:32 GMT -6
Even though I prefer using/playing the OD&D ruleset these days, I'll never truly quit Holmes. The blue book was where I started, and I think it still resonates with me because of the artwork and the examples of play, which together depict both dungeons and dragons far better than the little black brown books.
[Edit: slipped into Traveller mode there, lol.]
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Dec 9, 2022 8:21:20 GMT -6
[takes finger off perma ban button] yer good. WHEW! Dat wuz close! As Maxwell Smart would say, "Missed it by THAT much." |
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Dec 9, 2022 10:01:59 GMT -6
While I love B/X and ADD 1e, over the years I've realized that I consider ODD the "best", because it's the foundation stone. You can build any house you like on it and it won't fall down. All the subsequent editions/permutations/mutations still stand on that rock.
(did I just mix a metaphor?)
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Dec 9, 2022 12:53:10 GMT -6
While I love B/X and ADD 1e, over the years I've realized that I consider ODD the "best", because it's the foundation stone. You can build any house you like on it and it won't fall down. All the subsequent editions/permutations/mutations still stand on that rock. (did I just mix a metaphor?) Even though I voted B/X, I agree ODD is the foundation and can't be beat. Kind of like I vote for Empire Strikes Back as the best SW movie, but without A New Hope it's couldn't be. |
|
|
|
Post by Greyharp on Dec 9, 2022 23:24:39 GMT -6
I voted OD&D. My journey started with Holmes, quickly moved onto AD&D, freely mixed in B/X and BECMI and then years later discovered OD&D. The fact that I then discovered that my starting point and long sentimental favourite, Holmes, was actually OD&D, well that just sealed the deal for me and so OD&D it is. |
|
|
|
Post by rsdean on Dec 10, 2022 3:50:42 GMT -6
I voted for OD&D. It’s debatable whether I spent more time running OD&D from 1976 to 1978 or 1e from 1978 to 1984, but, in either case, to my modern (i.e. old) brain, OD&D has as many rules as I need. Back in the day, I used to cut 1e down considerably in practice, and I discovered in later years that my “1e lite” was reasonably close to B/X. I’d happily pl;ay B/X if someone else were to run it, but I’d rather revisit the original if I’m running.
|
|
|
|
Post by rredmond on Dec 10, 2022 6:04:18 GMT -6
That’s interesting! I feel like my “1e lite” is closer to OD&D. But I am pretty sure I’d have a great time rolling dice at your table no matter the edition!
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Dec 10, 2022 10:54:52 GMT -6
I voted for OD&D. It’s debatable whether I spent more time running OD&D from 1976 to 1978 or 1e from 1978 to 1984, but, in either case, to my modern (i.e. old) brain, OD&D has as many rules as I need. Back in the day, I used to cut 1e down considerably in practice, and I discovered in later years that my “1e lite” was reasonably close to B/X. I’d happily pl;ay B/X if someone else were to run it, but I’d rather revisit the original if I’m running. With OD&D you can pretty much just make race + class clear and you have the perfect 1e. Then add that great content (not rules) like random tables and DM advice from the DMG, new spells and classes from the PHB, and the MM. Best 1e. |
|
|
|
Post by Punkrabbitt on Dec 10, 2022 17:19:12 GMT -6
Aside from 4th, which is a huge pile of burning dung, I am pretty happy mixing and matching between everything else to my heart's content. Sure, 3 & 5 like to have some balance, but we never worried about balance back in the day, so I am happy to kludge it all until it works.
|
|
tedopon
Newly-Registered User 
Posts: 86
|
Post by tedopon on Dec 11, 2022 10:51:16 GMT -6
A group I played in spent several years in 3.x-PF. We had rotating GMs, and I broke the game over and over again to where we would have to reset. Whenever we didn't know something offhand or within a reasonable time looking for the rule in real time at the table, I would make a ruling and we would agree to stick with it. Almost every single example of this would resurface a few sessions down the road as a problem because it changed the way a handful of other things would work that we hadn't foreseen. Like gamebreaking imbalance most times...which generally favors the NPCs as there are more of them. It's crazy how uniform that iteration of D&D was with nested math.
About the only thing I like about 5e is I can do the same thing and we haven't broken the system in the process.
|
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Dec 12, 2022 1:31:47 GMT -6
The Gygax trilogy of Original (1974), Basic (1977), and Advanced (1977) are immortal classics. My Christmas wish for every RPG player is to own their own a Gygax PHB and to be run through the original version of The Keep on the Borderlands. My Christmas wish for every RPG gamemaster is to read OD&D and Greyhawk and the DMG, and to run the original version of The Keep on the Borderlands.Outside that it’s all a smorgasbord of anonymous also-rans, each now deader than the next, while the Gygax editions chug along, their appeal everliving and self-evident.
Kudos to 3.0, though, prematurely slain and now strangely mega-obscure. I didn’t like it, but man did it revive a dead hobby! |
|
|
|
Post by simrion on Dec 12, 2022 4:47:34 GMT -6
The Gygax trilogy of Original (1974), Basic (1977), and Advanced (1977) are immortal classics. My Christmas wish for every RPG player is to own their own a Gygax PHB and to be run through the original version of The Keep on the Borderlands. My Christmas wish for every RPG gamemaster is to read OD&D and Greyhawk and the DMG, and to run the original version of The Keep on the Borderlands.What a wonderful wish!Outside that it’s all a smorgasbord of anonymous also-rans, each now deader than the next, while the Gygax editions chug along, their appeal everliving and self-evident. Still running some form of something - A Pathfinder campaign at "broken" levels LOL, a Star Wars D20 and a kit bashed adaptation of 3.0/AD&D 2nd written by Chris Perkins. Also playing in a near broken 3.5 Forgotten Realms campaign.Kudos to 3.0, though, prematurely slain and now strangely mega-obscure. I didn’t like it, but man did it revive a dead hobby! I have a massive library (well over 200 tomes) for 3.0/3.5 due to major discounts by local game store as the transitioned to 4th & 5th. If nothing else said tomes are inspirational idea generators. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Dec 12, 2022 11:37:13 GMT -6
Kudos to 3.0, though, prematurely slain and now strangely mega-obscure. I didn’t like it, but man did it revive a dead hobby! The thing that made 3.0 successful also killed it: the OGL + SRD. I will always be grateful to those who designed 3.0 for giving us that and putting the power of D&D into the hands of the fans. Forever. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Dec 12, 2022 11:38:17 GMT -6
Aside from 4th, which is a huge pile of burning dung, I am pretty happy mixing and matching between everything else to my heart's content. Sure, 3 & 5 like to have some balance, but we never worried about balance back in the day, so I am happy to kludge it all until it works. I mix and match so much that I've forgotten what rule or inspirational nugget comes from which edition. |
|
I probably read UA once or twice, but not really after that second time when the binding fell completely apart. I didn't really read, use, (or to be honest bother to understand) any of the books except the MM, PHB, DMG, FF, MM2 and the DDG for flavor. If I want newer fangled books, I'll read OSRIC and Monsters of Myth 
