anyone else considering switching to DaD?

[geoffrey]

I've been cobbling together a new campaign, and I planned on using Castles & Crusades. But then Dragons at Dawn came out of nowhere and blind-sided me (in a good way).

I'm seriously considering using DaD as my rules set instead of C&C. No decision has been made yet, but it is a serious possibility.

Is anyone else considering using DaD as their campaign's baseline rather than other iterations of Dungeons & Dragons?

(FWIW, I'll be using only the warrior and wizard classes, and I'll be using 10 levels for each.)

[Falconer]

No, I remain fundamentally devoted to Gygaxian Dungeons & Dragons circa 1978 for all my most major campaigns. However, I have long (well, for about the last ten years) wanted to do an Arnesonian short campaign or one-shot, based on bits cobbled together from Chainmail and The First Fantasy Campaign and otherwise making it up as we went (and it would actually be equal parts wargame and role-playing game, so tossing the basic assumptions out the window). So, Dragons at Dawn is definitely very intriguing to me. I intend to buy it at some point, take a look, and take it for a spin around the block. But I shy from saying I plan on “switching” as if I would be “converting” or something!

[tombowings]

I've definitely had similar thoughts about Dragons at Dawn, Geoffrey. There is a lot in the book that I really like, such as 1-10 ability scores and the (magician) magic system. On the other hand, the combat matrix looks like it would be a bit slow more my tastes--too many numbers and calculations. My ideal system seems to be something in the middle of Dragons at Dawn and Dungeons and Dragons with a couple other house rules thrown in for good measure.

For example, here is what I'm planning on using for shields in my upcoming game:

Shields: If a character is employing a shield, he or she may attempt to block a single incoming blow the character is aware of each round. The decision to block must be made before the attacker rolls to hit. To block an attack, a character must make a successful dexterity throw. If successful, the attack deals damage the shield rather than the character. A shield breaks when reduced to 0 hit points. When a shield is broken, the full force of the blow is dealt to the character, despite the block being successful.

Wooden shields have 10 hit points.
Metal shields have 25 hit points.

[Finarvyn]

Apr 13, 2010 13:09:33 GMT -6 Falconer said:

No, I remain fundamentally devoted to Gygaxian Dungeons & Dragons circa 1978 for all my most major campaigns. However, I have long (well, for about the last ten years) wanted to do an Arnesonian short campaign or one-shot, based on bits cobbled together from Chainmail and The First Fantasy Campaign and otherwise making it up as we went

Agreed. D@D is an interesting booklet and looks like a lot of fun to run/play, but my fundamental love is for the OD&D LBB and I don't see myself making a total switch.

[alvordian]

I am, at least partially.Its hard to seperate the core ideas of old scholl D&D from my mind, but I find this way quite liberating and fresh. Reading FFC now makes so much more sense, and I really have a new appriciation for DA's work in light of these rules.

I agree the combat matrix would take getting used to ( i.e. do monsters have dex scores?). I'm also not sure how I would use some ability checks versus classes special abilities like the thief assassin, for instance.

But I like how magic is handled as well as the ideas behind XP, Hit Die and HPV. Warriors are more than the sum of their gear and exploration and character really take center stage in D@D.

Would take some work, but I'll probably put together something in the near future.

[Random]

I'm not running the game wholesale, but I'm cooking up a "Players' Handbook" for a potential summer D&D game that is outright stealing the magic system from Dragons at Dawn. I'm going with humans only and three classes (fighter, sorcerer, and thief), at least initially, for player characters.

I have to resist the urge to include elaborate sword-fighting rules, as I'm in the midst of reading The Three Musketeers as well as the Solomon Kane short stories.

[EdOWar]

I don't think I'd convert wholesale from D&D, but I'd consider running a separate game using DaD. And I'd definitely steal any good ideas I liked.

[eris]

As others have already written, I don't think I'd convert over, but I'm very tempted to steal some bits...perhaps even some very large bits like the magic system.

[aldarron]

One thing about running a straight DaD campaign (for any who may be thinking of doing so) is that you will find it has a much wider and open ended feel to it than a usual D&D campaign, primarily because of the variety of classes and the options of characterization that arise through the Education system. Frankly, it surprised me how versitle and creative players become when you throw merchants and sages and monster characters into the mix. Suddenly the party takes on a much more complex roleplaying dynamic than the one composed standard adventurers with predictable backgrounds and abilities. For me it was a real eye opener and made some of the stories Dave related about the early games make a whole lot more sense.

[kesher]

Apr 14, 2010 19:30:36 GMT -6 aldarron said:

Frankly, it surprised me how versitle and creative players become when you throw merchants and sages and monster characters into the mix. Suddenly the party takes on a much more complex roleplaying dynamic than the one composed standard adventurers with predictable backgrounds and abilities. For me it was a real eye opener and made some of the stories Dave related about the early games make a whole lot more sense.

I'd love to hear more about this---do you have some examples from playtesting? I imagine it'd be useful info for anyone planning to run the game, too.

[tombowings]

I'd be interested in look at those, too.

[aldarron]

Lots on my plate these days unfortunetly, but I will eventually try to write up some adventure snipets to post online and possibly include in the Dragons at Twilight supplement which should be ready sometime this summer. Tavis' report from the Memorial game day does have a little bit along those lines though.

[geordie]

I'm DMing D@D next week over in Amsterdam - the characters are villains (players have already picked warriors/wizards/monsters) working for the Egg of Coot, and have to fight their way up through Glendower Dungeon.

Anxious but psyched

(very timely: print copy arrived today - yay!)

[Finarvyn]

Apr 13, 2010 17:50:19 GMT -6 Random said:

I'm cooking up a "Players' Handbook" for a potential summer D&D game that is outright stealing the magic system from Dragons at Dawn.

And we'll all be hoping that you share, Random!

[kesher]

Apr 15, 2010 11:52:56 GMT -6 @geordie said:

I'm DMing D@D next week over in Amsterdam - the characters are villains (players have already picked warriors/wizards/monsters) working for the Egg of Coot, and have to fight their way up through Glendower Dungeon.

Anxious but psyched

(very timely: print copy arrived today - yay!)

Well, your report is going to be extremely valuable at this point! Can't wait to read it!

[havard]

I find it really cool that people are already planning campaigns with Dragons at Dawn. I am still eagerly waiting for my copy to arrive so I will see what I can use it for


Havard

[tavis]

This is the actual play report from the NYC Arneson Gameday that aldarron mentioned above. I just edited it to clarify that it was DaD that we were using, as I think it hadn't been announced when I wrote that wrapup.

[kesher]

Thanks for linking that, Tavis---I hadn't read it. Man, that sounds like it was a great time!

It becomes clearer and clearer to me that the true manifestation of oldskool spirit, whatever the rules, are the weird things that happen when you just let players do whatever they want, constrained only by the lack of rules. Which means, of course, they get to let their imaginations out of the box...

I'd love to hear some more about the how the mechanics worked in actual play---combat, frex, as well as the magic and miracle systems...

[tavis]

We didn't do a lot of combat. In part this was because I imported reaction rolls from OD&D (which aren't described in DaD IIRC), so some encounters began with parleying instead of attacking. In part it was because, through some mix of habitual old-school playstyle and having classes like merchant and sage whose abilities didn't be to get into fights, the players sought to achieve their ends without fighting. When we did have melees, I typically didn't use Dex modifiers to combat. The fact that the players almost all rolled 1 for their level on the 1d4 and were fighting higher-HD creatures often meant that they needed to roll under very low target numbers, which I think may have also disincentivized fighting. I believe that Daniel shifted the chart by a row to help address this problem.

I also think I didn't always handle the rules properly. For example, when Bloodgrave the cleric turned the wights, I had them run: I think the actual result should have been for their morale to drop a step, reducing their fighting capability.

So I fear my experience wasn't a great playtest of the rules, but it was a great time.

[aldarron]

Apr 16, 2010 13:03:50 GMT -6 tavis said:

I also think I didn't always handle the rules properly. For example, when Bloodgrave the cleric turned the wights, I had them run: I think the actual result should have been for their morale to drop a step, reducing their fighting capability.

So I fear my experience wasn't a great playtest of the rules, but it was a great time.

Actually no, Tavis had it right, when priests (or anybody else, for that matter) are turning undead and they fail a morale check, the undead run - the morale condition table is ignored.

I did adjust the combat table by one column from the table in the advance copy Tavis has - which is as much as I could do without getting away from the Chainmail percentages the table draws on.

But I think it was as "proper" an application of the rules as any. The modifiers are largely optional and I generally only use the dex modifier in combats with particular humaniod NPC's or some unusual creatures. You can bet Dave Arneson was never hidebound to the rules!

[jblittlefield]

Apr 13, 2010 13:56:15 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

Apr 13, 2010 13:09:33 GMT -6 Falconer said:

No, I remain fundamentally devoted to Gygaxian Dungeons & Dragons circa 1978 for all my most major campaigns. However, I have long (well, for about the last ten years) wanted to do an Arnesonian short campaign or one-shot, based on bits cobbled together from Chainmail and The First Fantasy Campaign and otherwise making it up as we went

Agreed. D@D is an interesting booklet and looks like a lot of fun to run/play, but my fundamental love is for the OD&D LBB and I don't see myself making a total switch.

Ditto -- I'm not really into Arneson's style of play

[doc]

Mine just came in the mail yesterday. Since the end of my Carcosa game we have been playing a Tunnels & Trolls adventure. Once we wrap that one up in a few weeks I plan to run a D@D adventure. I doubt that it'll replace our usual system, but who knows.

First thing I am going to do after reading the rules is, just for crits and giggles, convert my Blackmoor character from the early 80's to D@D.

[havard]

Apr 17, 2010 18:22:02 GMT -6 doc said:

First thing I am going to do after reading the rules is, just for crits and giggles, convert my Blackmoor character from the early 80's to D@D.

I just got a notice that Lulu has shipped my copy. I am interested in any Blackmoor conversions to D@D.

Havard

[geordie]

I'm thinking of writing a setting guide based around the premise:

'What if Holmes had got has hands on Arneson's original rules instead of OD&D?'

[kesher]

Apr 19, 2010 17:19:15 GMT -6 @geordie said:

I'm thinking of writing a setting guide based around the premise:

'What if Holmes had got has hands on Arneson's original rules instead of OD&D?'

So, what, do you people think I have nothing better to do with my time than sit around reading the tremendous stuff you think up? Do you? I have a life, you know...

[geordie]

Apr 19, 2010 20:28:20 GMT -6 kesher said:

Apr 19, 2010 17:19:15 GMT -6 @geordie said:

I'm thinking of writing a setting guide based around the premise:

'What if Holmes had got has hands on Arneson's original rules instead of OD&D?'

So, what, do you people think I have nothing better to do with my time than sit around reading the tremendous stuff you think up? Do you? I have a life, you know...

Cheers ! - but all the setting stuff is in the Holmes threads on this very board, Doc's Holmes stuff is great. The stats are easy to convert to D@D. Reading thru it today, I'd be wasting my time trying to top that. On to the next idea.

[Finarvyn]

Apr 19, 2010 17:19:15 GMT -6 @geordie said:

I'm thinking of writing a setting guide based around the premise:

'What if Holmes had got has hands on Arneson's original rules instead of OD&D?'

See, now this should have been its own thread!

[bluskreem]

My copy came in yesterday, and after reading to cover to cover in one sitting I have to say D@D is right up my ally. I already use free form skills in most of my BECMI games, and I love the combat system. I'd switch in a heart beat.

I only wish my group was a little more open to trying new systems. I can mod BECMI, or LL until it's completely unrecognizable and no one complains, but it took months to get a S&S game going.