OD&D using the AD&D Players Handbook plus 3 more pages

[geoffrey]

The OD&D versions of the 11 classes in the AD&D Players Handbook are in the following sources:

Cleric: Men & Magic
Druid: Eldritch Wizardry
Fighter: Men & Magic
Paladin: Greyhawk
Ranger: The Strategic Review #2
Magic-user: Men & Magic
Illusionist: The Strategic Review #4 and The Dragon #1
Thief: Greyhawk
Assassin: Blackmoor
Monk: Blackmoor
Bard: The Strategic Review #6

You'd need four books and four magazines for all of that. (Or, if you get the Best of The Dragon, you can reduce that to four books and one magazine.)

The above shines a bright light on the following from the back cover of the AD&D Players Handbook: "NO MORE SEARCHING THROUGH STACKS OF BOOKS AND MAGAZINES TO FIND OUT WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW. THE PLAYERS HANDBOOK PUTS IT ALL AT YOUR FINGERTIPS."

So finally my point: You can basically play OD&D using little more than the AD&D Players Handbook. Simply ignore mentions of segments, and there you go. You can have a complete game using only the following:

1. the AD&D Players Handbook
2. the consolidated to-hit chart and the consolidated saving throw chart by Gygax and Lakofka on pages 48 and 50 of Dragon #80 (Dec. 1983)
3. the cleric turn undead chart on page 40 of Dragon #22 (Feb. 1979) [later printed across two pages of the DMG]

That's it! Fill in anything else with your own imagination, OD&D-style.

Imagine an OD&D game with a single hardcover book (with 100% of its illustrations by Sutherland or by Trampier) and with 3 printed-out pages. This actually tempts me to re-purchase an AD&D Players Handbook...

[Falconer]

Geoffrey, that’s exactly where I’m at here’s a similar thread, actually). I came out of a phase of 3LBB purism in the realization that the players just stinkin’ love having a wide selection of classes. If it’s fun, it’s fun. The 1e PHB does it best, and what I *really* love about it — and what I have *never* found another example of anywhere in the RPG industry — is the fact that it *really* sticks to player-only information. Also, they’re cheap. So, I let my players use the PHB*, and as DM I use whatever the hell other materials I want. I love the OD&D and JG books, so that is what I go to for inspiration. Recently I used the RC when running B4. My combat procedure looks basically the same no matter what books I’ve got in front of me. So the PHB is the only gospel in my games (with the usual caveats: no weapon-vs-ac adjustments, no weapon speeds, no psionics, spell components are just for flavor, etc.).

* I have also recently been letting my players use Best of Dragon #2 for additional classes. I am not 100% happy with them, but they are fine for inspiration and can obviously be tweaked.

[Falconer]

On a slightly related note, I don’t know if you followed the thread about this on K&K, but I recently ran a game using only the AD&D DM Screen (folded up, not set up, FWIW) and the 2-page White Dwarf Moria scenario. Never had to crack open a book once (and not because I have anything memorized — I don’t — the module just has everything I need printed in there). Of course I did have to pregen the character sheets and print up spellbooks fro them from here. But it was a VERY fun game, more so than Arkham Horror or something like that which requires a huge amount of setup. I just showed up and passed out character sheets and it was game on.

[waysoftheearth]

Aug 18, 2013 20:39:17 GMT -6 geoffrey said:

Imagine an OD&D game with a single hardcover book

I pretty sure the above is, more-or-less, what is contained in the S&W Complete hard back too. Not to mention that other hard back that's currently in the pipe

[Deleted]

Aug 18, 2013 20:39:17 GMT -6 geoffrey said:

Imagine an OD&D game with a single hardcover book (with 100% of its illustrations by Sutherland or by Trampier) and with 3 printed-out pages. This actually tempts me to re-purchase an AD&D Players Handbook...

I was going to suggest simply using the PHB with the AD&D DM Screen, but Falconer pretty much has that covered.

Aug 18, 2013 21:14:20 GMT -6 Falconer said:

On a slightly related note, I don’t know if you followed the thread about this on K&K, but I recently ran a game using only the AD&D DM Screen (folded up, not set up, FWIW) and the 2-page White Dwarf Moria scenario.

Is the K&K thread in the Adventure Notes AD&D board which requires registration?

Last year I ran an OD&D session using only the Ready Ref Sheets and Frontier Forts of Kelnore. PCs were restricted to Fighting-Person types. Anything missing was adjudicated on the spot, by memory or interpretation. It stood out as an extra fun session for both the players and myself.

[Falconer]

The thread is here.

[ffilz]

I essentially did this.

I started an AD&D campaign back in late spring/early summer of 1979 with the PH, MM, and Dragon #22.

I must have used the OD&D books for magic item charts and descriptions.

Frank

[Stormcrow]

*shrug* Back in the day, there wasn't a hyper-awareness of "editions." AD&D was just a big compilation of D&D rules.

[Deleted]

Aug 19, 2013 13:39:17 GMT -6 Stormcrow said:

*shrug* Back in the day, there wasn't a hyper-awareness of "editions." AD&D was just a big compilation of D&D rules.

Recently I have been reading early issues of White Dwarf magazine, which include reviews of the AD&D books as they came out, and frequent mentions of OD&D and Holmes. Except there is no mention of OD&D, Holmes, or AD&D. It's all just "D&D". Reading articles about D&D which lack "edition" consciousness, much less partisanship, is refreshing.

[Falconer]

But, guys, at this point in the conversation don’t you think we should dig up some old Dragon editorials Gygax did, and blow them way out of proportion?

[Falconer]

By the way, I have a copy of the paperback PHB that GW sold real early on. If thick, heavy tomes don't appeal to you, this will do the trick alright. The sucker is totally thin and light. I sometimes throw it in my Holmes Box.

[Deleted]

Aug 19, 2013 16:45:58 GMT -6 Falconer said:

By the way, I have a copy of the paperback PHB that GW sold real early on. If thick, heavy tomes don't appeal to you, this will do the trick alright. The sucker is totally thin and light. I sometimes throw it in my Holmes Box.

It was only last week that I discovered these existed, due to an advertisement in White Dwarf. Sounds like a treasure!

[Deleted]

Aug 19, 2013 14:04:56 GMT -6 Falconer said:

But, guys, at this point in the conversation don’t you think we should dig up some old Dragon editorials Gygax did, and blow them way out of proportion?

You are a bad, bad man.

[geoffrey]

Aug 19, 2013 16:45:58 GMT -6 Falconer said:

By the way, I have a copy of the paperback PHB that GW sold real early on. If thick, heavy tomes don't appeal to you, this will do the trick alright. The sucker is totally thin and light. I sometimes throw it in my Holmes Box.

Neat. I have seen a paperback Monster Manual, but I didn't know about a paperback Players Handbook.

[bycrom]

By Crom! Have yourself an exalt Geoffrey! I count 8 blank pages between the inside and outside covers of my pristine PH to paste the needed tables, best B/X procedural and favorite OSR house rules

Between my DM screen and DM Binder of Collected Awesomeness (+3) I am left wanting for nothing.

Except for wenches and wine, by Crom!

[Finarvyn]

Aug 19, 2013 16:45:58 GMT -6 Falconer said:

By the way, I have a copy of the paperback PHB that GW sold real early on. If thick, heavy tomes don't appeal to you, this will do the trick alright. The sucker is totally thin and light. I sometimes throw it in my Holmes Box.

Tell me more about this. Is it similar to the final product? What is contained therein? (I've never looked at paperback copies of any AD&D books.)

[Deleted]

Until you get some first-hand info, here's some documentation from the Acaeum:

Monster Manual Foreign Editions

Players Handbook Foreign Editions

[Falconer]

Here you go, Fin:

Games Workshop Monster Manual
Games Workshop Players Handbook

Everything is the exact same as the TSR hardcovers — they’re just perfect bound paperbacks. 8.5" x 11"

EDIT: Aww, scooped!

[rsdean]

Aug 19, 2013 13:36:31 GMT -6 ffilz said:

I started an AD&D campaign back in late spring/early summer of 1979 with the PH, MM, and Dragon #22.

I must have used the OD&D books for magic item charts and descriptions.

Frank

My experience is similar, but with advancing age it's harder to remember the details. We started our game in 1976, but somewhere that summer of '79 we mostly shifted over to the PHB and Dragon DMG preview as the working rules. In retrospect, the actual mechanics don't seem much different, so the debate in our group probably had to do with hit points (dice size increasing) and how to transfer a Strategic Review bard into the game.

Rob

[ffilz]

Yea, I wish I remembered more details, and had more game artifacts from that era. I do still have my primary dungeon from that era that I ran sessions in on and off.

I started in fall of 1977 with the Holmes Basic my friend got for his birthday. After Christmas, I started making photocopies of the same friend's Chivalry & Sorcery and was running that on and off. Summer of 1978 I know I ran some D&D with my little sister as we drove across country (and she made a dungeon and ran me a couple times too). I got the PH for Christmas that year, so that gaming must have been OD&D or maybe Holmes (I don't remember if I ever had my own copy). I do know I couldn't have done THAT much running of OD&D, at least not from my books (I do recall I had some photocopies of OD&D stuff also) since they are still in pristine condition. My copy of OD&D is a "Original Collector's Edition".

Once the DMG came out, we switched to exclusively AD&D, though before it arrived in stores in the Boston area I had already used it. We were playing at MIT and some of the folks were looking through an advance copy because they had play tested or something (I had always thought they were listed in the credits, but I don't think it was any of the folks listed as I read the credits today, though Peter Aronson was involved with MITSGS). We had some question, and one of the guys reading the DMG said, "Oh, I think that's covered, let me look it up."

Of course over the years, various bits from magazines and other third party supplements got added (and taken out, I remember using the Arduin Grimoire special abilities rolls and then later taking them out).

Frank

[Falconer]

I have never heard of a DMG advance copy!

[ffilz]

I don't think it was super in advance, I think they got them around the time of Gencon. I'm pretty sure they had not attended Gencon. Very fuzzy, I just remember that while there was a group of people reading through the DMG and going "ooh ahh", I was running a game, and at some point a question came up, and they found me the answer in the DMG.

Sadly I've lost touch with all those folks (though I did get in touch with some of my players from back then).

One of these days I need to scan my old dungeons and stuff.

Frank

[Finarvyn]

Aug 20, 2013 16:40:10 GMT -6 @droll said:

Until you get some first-hand info, here's some documentation from the Acaeum:

Monster Manual Foreign Editions

Players Handbook Foreign Editions

Aug 20, 2013 16:42:53 GMT -6 Falconer said:

Here you go, Fin:

Games Workshop Monster Manual
Games Workshop Players Handbook

Everything is the exact same as the TSR hardcovers — they’re just perfect bound paperbacks. 8.5" x 11"

EDIT: Aww, scooped!

Thanks to both of you. I saw paperback copies one year at GenCon so knew that they existed, but didn't take the time to look inside. Nice to know that they are exactly the same book. (Unlike the UK Holmes basic book, which I guess has different interior art.)

[grodog]

Aug 27, 2013 15:09:53 GMT -6 ffilz said:

I don't think it was super in advance, I think they got them around the time of Gencon. I'm pretty sure they had not attended Gencon. Very fuzzy, I just remember that while there was a group of people reading through the DMG and going "ooh ahh", I was running a game, and at some point a question came up, and they found me the answer in the DMG.

Interesting, Frank! Do you think they might have been looking at the DMG preview articles in Dragon #22 (see www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/periodicals/drgscans/dragon22.html for the cover), or was it definitely a stand-alone book?

[ffilz]

Aug 30, 2013 9:18:45 GMT -6 grodog said:

Aug 27, 2013 15:09:53 GMT -6 ffilz said:

I don't think it was super in advance, I think they got them around the time of Gencon. I'm pretty sure they had not attended Gencon. Very fuzzy, I just remember that while there was a group of people reading through the DMG and going "ooh ahh", I was running a game, and at some point a question came up, and they found me the answer in the DMG.

Interesting, Frank! Do you think they might have been looking at the DMG preview articles in Dragon #22 (see www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/periodicals/drgscans/dragon22.html for the cover), or was it definitely a stand-alone book?

It was the book for sure. I suppose it's possible that it was after Gencon, but I have this vague memory that the person who's book it was had NOT gone to Gencon (and in fact, the game session may have even been during the dates of Gencon). But memories are faulty.

I know for sure it wasn't the Dragon preview because I was already using that...

I think the question was in the vein of how a spell worked underwater (don't think it was that, but a similar type of clarification in the DMG).

Frank

[Finarvyn]

Aug 18, 2013 20:39:17 GMT -6 geoffrey said:

You can basically play OD&D using little more than the AD&D Players Handbook. Simply ignore mentions of segments, and there you go. You can have a complete game using only the following:

1. the AD&D Players Handbook
2. the consolidated to-hit chart and the consolidated saving throw chart by Gygax and Lakofka on pages 48 and 50 of Dragon #80 (Dec. 1983)
3. the cleric turn undead chart on page 40 of Dragon #22 (Feb. 1979) [later printed across two pages of the DMG]

That's it! Fill in anything else with your own imagination, OD&D-style.

Curse you, Geoffrey, you've got my brain thinking about this constantly now. I'm at work trying to get stuff done, and thinking "how can I pull this off....?"

I was planning on launching a new OD&D campaign for my group (short adventures prior to Bears games, when we watch football) and now I'm trying to decide how much AD&D I want in my OD&D.

A few thoughts:
1. AD&D goes to level 20, but I never play that high. But maybe I should give it a shot.
2. I like the OD&D hit-dice progression better than that of AD&D.
3. I like the fact that AD&D organizes things better than OD&D.
4. I like AD&D's equipment options but OD&D's AC options so I probably would thin our armor choices.
5. I have to think about spell options; I kind of like MU spells for level 1-6 only instead of 1-9.

Just too many decisions. I don't think there are so many changes to be a "deal breaker" to the idea, but I may have to try to assemble some sort of house doc instead of actually using the PH. I guess I could start with OSRIC.... but if I'm not careful I'll make way too much work for myself.

[scottenkainen]

Sept 6, 2013 14:28:59 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

Just too many decisions. I don't think there are so many changes to be a "deal breaker" to the idea, but I may have to try to assemble some sort of house doc instead of actually using the PH. I guess I could start with OSRIC.... but if I'm not careful I'll make way too much work for myself.

Yeah, I'm the same way. "This time, for sure, a house rules document in just one page!" But it never happens that way. Many pages later...

~Scott "-enkainen" Casper

[Deleted]

I think a lot of people did just what you are suggesting. Segments and weapons vs. armor types were not widely used I have heard (although I wasn't around when AD&D came out initially, so I don't know).

[bea]

Sept 6, 2013 15:13:05 GMT -6 scottenkainen said:

Sept 6, 2013 14:28:59 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

Just too many decisions. I don't think there are so many changes to be a "deal breaker" to the idea, but I may have to try to assemble some sort of house doc instead of actually using the PH. I guess I could start with OSRIC.... but if I'm not careful I'll make way too much work for myself.

Yeah, I'm the same way. "This time, for sure, a house rules document in just one page!" But it never happens that way. Many pages later...

~Scott "-enkainen" Casper

I'm pretty sure this is how most simulacrum games start God knows I'm guilty of it myself. But once I find The Ultimate Rules Compilation of Doom and Awesomeness It won't be that way anymore. It just has to contain all the rules I need and none of those I don't, be really neatly organised and have a nice and readable layout.

So, Geoffrey, is this what I'm looking for?

[Falconer]

If you want a version of OD&D that keeps reassuring you you don’t need any house rules, AD&D is it.