D&D 1E The indispensible 1e

[Neonchameleon]

The enthusiasm. 1e really reads to me to be like someone saying "Here's something I like and I think you should like it too." Of course it has all the downsides of such an event. But the enthusiasm is very nice.

 

[Serendipity]

You must mean the reprint cover. The cover of the REAL 1E DMG was done by Dave Sutherland III.

Very true, but the reprint cover was by Jeff Easley. Sutherland, Trampier, Otus, Roslof, Willingham, and Dee *defined* D&D to me for many years. Man, I love those old school artists.

 

[Minigiant]

To 1e, one of the greatest part about 1e was that if you had a very good DM who was a very good adjudicator, there was little stopping him or her from providing a good game.

 

[Neonchameleon]

To 1e, one of the greatest part about 1e was that if you had a very good DM who was a very good adjudicator, there was little stopping him or her from providing a good game.

I'm trying and failing to see how that doesn't apply to every other RPG up to and including FATAL.

 

[Mircoles]

The 1e/2e multi-classing is really the only thing that I miss. 3.xe multi-classing has always had the wrong feel to it. 4e hybridization has a similar feel to it without some of the problems, but lacks three class multi-classing.
Dual-classing was interesting too, but I never cared for the no Xp if you use old class abilities rule. Also, that it was exclusive to humans, I didn't care for either.

 

[Libramarian]

And perhaps one of the most important things: the players don't need to know all of the rules, and a brand-new player doesn't have to learn much before he can start playing. I've never had a new player not "get" how to play Basic D&D or AD&D within minutes, unlike my experience with teaching WotC D&D to new players.

It's funny how WotC D&D makes so much more demands on players from a math-y character optimization perspective, but then the books read like they're grade-school textbooks.

Like:
You should play a Dragonborn if...
- You want to look like a Dragon

Lol I mean...really. I should play a Dragonborn if I want to look like a Dragon. When the picture is right there. I guess the thought was there's nothing lost by trying to write for as broad an audience as possible, but that's just not true. And I just don't understand what portion of humanity is both capable of designing a powerful 4e character and playing them well, but then also needs to be told like this that choosing Dragonborn lets them look like a Dragon.

 

[Minigiant]

I'm trying and failing to see how that doesn't apply to every other RPG up to and including FATAL.

Oh it's true for almost every edition, 1e just had the fewest barriers.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I love 1E, but are people seriously nostalgic for weapon speed factors and weapon vs. AC adjustments? They were one of the first things we ditched for over-complicating the combat system.

 

[Stormonu]

You must mean the reprint cover. The cover of the REAL 1E DMG was done by Dave Sutherland III. Otus always had a very narrow appeal for me. To me the CONSUMMATE D&D artist was and always will be Trampier.

The reprinted 1E DMG was Easley (as was the 2E DMG), not Otis. Otis did do the covers for the Moldvay/Cook B/X covers of the D&D boxed set.

For a long time, I didn't like Otis's work - something looked wrong or unreal about it, and I much preferred realistic-looking artwork; something you felt you could actually step into, that the fantasy was real (works like Parkinson, Easley, Elmore, etc.). However, I've come to appreciate Otis's work.

 

[Stormonu]

I love 1E, but are people seriously nostalgic for weapon speed factors and weapon vs. AC adjustments? They were one of the first things we ditched for over-complicating the combat system.

Weapon speeds, yes, they were mostly a good idea. They actually gave a reason why some folks might choose a smaller, lighter weapon like a dagger instead of always grabbing for a two-handed sword.

Vs. AC adjustments were a little too fiddly for my tastes.