Old D&D? AD&D? OSRIC? Anyone?

[fmitchell]

After reading a controversial review of the AD&D 1e PHB, I started wondering about the recent trend of "old-school gaming".

Does anyone still play versions of D&D before 3.x? Does anyone use OSRIC rules, or Hackmaster, or any other retro rulesets? Can someone explain the appeal to me?

(Caveat: I never really cottoned to D&D. I preferred Melee/Wizard/The Fantasy Trip when I started out, and reached an epiphany when I encountered RuneQuest. After being a GURPS fan for ages, I've glommed onto lighter rules like FATE and PDQ. So, I might be a hard sell ...)

Thanks in advance.

[Farcaster]

When D&D 3.0 came out, I was not trilled. I had been using second edition since day one of its release. I knew virtually every intimate detail of the rules. I could virtually turn to the exact page I was looking for in my source material by feel. Understandably, I was not eager to have to learn a new set of rules and on top of that buy all new material.

Fast forward two years later, and the campaign I was running was approaching 13th level -- for everyone except the rogue, who was 16th level or so by this point and quite bored. Leveling had ground to a halt because of the vast chasms of experience required between levels. There was also dreadfully little in the entire Monster Manual that could really give my players a run for their money. But, I still had a ton of additional material for the current campaign.

Top that off with the release of Neverwinter Nights which was based on 3rd edition rules. I finally decided to switch, and I am 100% glad that I did. Although I sometimes lament the formulaic feel of magic items and spells in 3rd edition, it gave my players room to continue to develop their characters. That campaign (actually a set of 3 campaigns) finally ended with the characters being around 26th-27th level.

That is the failing of 1st and 2nd edition. They did not scale well. Past 13th level or so, the game was truly broken. The spell save chart is a perfect example of that as well. High level characters were virtually immune to spells regardless of the relative power of the enemy caster. You had the same number to roll to save against a lowly level 1 wizard's Burning Hands, and a level 15th wizards Disintegrate.

Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed 1st and 2nd edition. But, the time has come to move on. It might be interesting to have a nostalgia night and run an old-style game, but at the end of the day, I'll be going back to something a bit more smoothed out.

[Ed Zachary]

Does anyone still play versions of D&D before 3.x? Does anyone use OSRIC rules, or Hackmaster, or any other retro rulesets? Can someone explain the appeal to me?

The 2nd ed rule I may want to carry over to my campaign is from the Optional Skillz and Powers book. I like the Idea of splitting each of the six abilities into two minor abilities. Based on how our group used it in 2nd edition, this is how I would likely use it in 3.5:

Strength (Muscle and Stamina)

Muscle: Your ability to cause damage and bring your Strength to bear in short bursts.
- Attack Bonus (melee weapons)
- Damage Bonus
- Abilities requiring bursts of power (Bending, Breaking, Lifting)

Stamina: Your ability to move and bring your Strength to bear over a long period of time.
- Movement Rate (Walk, Run, Jump, Swim, Fly)
- Encumbrance
- Abilities requiring endurance

Dexterity (Aim and Balance)

Aim: Determines how well you can manipulate objects with your hands.
- Attack Bonus (missile weapons, finesse, touch)
- Severity of Fumbles
- Skills requiring hand control (Forgery, Lock Picking, Set/Disarm Traps, etc)
- Crafts requiring hand control (Music, Painting, Sculpting)

Balance: Determines how well you can control your body movement.
- Armor Class Bonus
- Saving Throws: Reflex
- Quickness and Initiative
- Skills requiring body control (Balancing, Climbing, Escaping, Jumping, etc)
- Skills requiring stealthiness (Hiding, Moving Silently)
- Performances requiring body control (Dancing)

Fortitude (Constitution and Toughness)

Constitution: Your ability to resist disease and death magic.
- Saving Throws: Fortitude (Health/Necromancy)
- Resist Toxins (Disease, Poison, Paralyzation, Petrification, etc)
- System Shock

Toughness: Your ability to sustain physical damage, and once damaged heal from it.
- Hit Point Bonus
- Resist Elements (Acid, Cold, Electricity, Fire, Sonic)
- Natural Healing

Intelligence (Knowledge and Reason)

Knowledge: How much information you can store in your memory.
- Number of Skills known
- Arcane spells known
- Skills requiring knowledge (Knowledge, Profession, Spellcraft)

Reason: Your ability to learn new knowledge, and see through falsehoods.
- Learn new Arcane Spells
- Bonus Arcane Spells (Wizard)
- Skills requiring reason and logic (Appraise, Decipher, Research, Use Device)

Wisdom (Intuition and Willpower)

Intuition: Your common sense and ability to be aware of what is around you.
- Bonus Divine Spells
- Skills requiring awareness (Heal, Listen, Sense Motive, Spot, Survival)

Willpower: Your mental strength, used to influence or resist mental attacks.
- Saving Throws: Willpower, Mind, Magic
- Skills requiring mental discipline (Concentration)

Charisma (Appearance and Leadership)

Appearance: Your physical beauty, how others see you.
- Physical appearance
- Reaction Bonus
- Skills requiring appearance (Disguise, Seduction)
- Fate, Fortune and Luck

Leadership: Your personality, likability and ability to influence and attract others.
- Bonus Arcane Spells (Sorcerer)
- Attract Cohorts, Followers and Henchmen
- Skills requiring leadership (Acting, Bluffing, Diplomacy, Gathering Info, Handling Animals, Intimidation)

[fmitchell]

The 2nd ed rule I may want to carry over to my campaign is from the Optional Skillz and Powers book. I like the Idea of splitting each of the six abilities into two minor abilities.

Hm, six abilities into 12? Or 18? I don't see the reason for additional complexity.

However, I have seen (and at least skimmed) a PDF called "A Skill for Everything", which adds three skills for each characteristic that boosts a subset of attribute rolls. You might take a look at that.

For that matter, I've considered a "skills and only skills" system where what other games would make attributes are structurally similar to skills. After seeing FATE, PDQ, and HeroQuest, I really question the need for the distinction between "attributes" and "skills" (or "spells", "feats", etc.). Maybe if you want to posit some correlation between Ability A and Ability B, they could be based on a more fundamental ability ... although I've never seen necessary correlations between manual dexterity and physical agility, or tolerances for physical trauma, physical exertion, poisons, and diseases.

[Ed Zachary]

Hm, six abilities into 12? Or 18? I don't see the reason for additional complexity.

For that matter, I've considered a "skills and only skills" system where what other games would make attributes are structurally similar to skills. After seeing FATE, PDQ, and HeroQuest, I really question the need for the distinction between "attributes" and "skills" (or "spells", "feats", etc.). Maybe if you want to posit some correlation between Ability A and Ability B, they could be based on a more fundamental ability ... although I've never seen necessary correlations between manual dexterity and physical agility, or tolerances for physical trauma, physical exertion, poisons, and diseases.

To each their own, but I don't see 12 as a difficult number. And not 12 independent abilities, but the same six with two different aspects each.

How do you characterize the ugly dictator with a strong personality, or the beauty with a repulsive personality and no leadership?

For me, it passes the two key questions...
1 - Does it add to the game?
2 - Is it simple?

[Skunkape]

The 2nd ed rule I may want to carry over to my campaign is from the Optional Skillz and Powers book. I like the Idea of splitting each of the six abilities into two minor abilities. Based on how our group used it in 2nd edition, this is how I would likely use it in 3.5:

I don't remember how you derived the split stats, and my book is put away somewhere, where I won't be able to find it easily. Would you care to explain how to split up the stats Ed?

By the way, when I looked at Skills & Powers book years ago, I thought it had some good ideas in it.

[Ed Zachary]

I don't remember how you derived the split stats, and my book is put away somewhere, where I won't be able to find it easily. Would you care to explain how to split up the stats Ed? By the way, when I looked at Skills & Powers book years ago, I thought it had some good ideas in it.

I tried to explain it as simply as possible above without writing my own book. And that book was written for the 2nd edition. I am in the preliminary stages of setting up a campaign, and this is how I would likely use it for 3.5 rules. Nothing is set in stone. And even them, change happens. If you have any suggestions, I'd be glad to hear them.

For example you would use Str/Mus for your attack bonus and damage, and encumbrance would be calculated from Str/Sta.

Ranged attacks and other hand manipulation skills would use Dex/Aim, and AC, Reflex Save, Initiative and skills like Move Silent would use Dex/Bal.

Fortitude Saves and System Shock would use Fort/Con, and Hit Points would use Fort/Tough.

Skills known would use Int/Knw, and a Wizard's arcane spell bonus would use Int/Reason.

A Priest's divine spell bonus would use Wis/Intuition, and Will Saves would use Wis/Will.

What a character looks like and reaction bonus would use Cha/Appear, and skills like Diplomacy and Intimidation would use Cha/Lead, as well as a Sorcerer's arcane spell bonus.

[Skunkape]

But I seem to remember that you can shift points between the two, like have one a couple of points higher than the other as long as they average to the original stat, or am I remembering a different game?

[Ed Zachary]

But I seem to remember that you can shift points between the two, like have one a couple of points higher than the other as long as they average to the original stat, or am I remembering a different game?

Yes, when you initially set the character up, each of the minors can go up and down up to two points each for a spread of four. Afterward, the spread can increase, but the major stat remains the average.

A Fighter could start out with Str=16, adjusted to Str/Mus=18 and Str/Sta=14. After a few levels his Str/Mus increases to 22 while his Str/Sta remains 14. His Str would now be 18.

[Skunkape]

Yes, when you initially set the character up, each of the minors can go up and down up to two points each for a spread of four. Afterward, the spread can increase, but the major stat remains the average.

A Fighter could start out with Str=16, adjusted to Str/Mus=18 and Str/Sta=14. After a few levels his Str/Mus increases to 22 while his Str/Sta remains 14. His Str would now be 18.

I thought that was how it worked! Thanks for confirming my memory!

Course, it amazes my wife how I can remember things about gaming and sci-fi movies and books but can't remember to take out the garbage!

[Llwch]

After reading a controversial review of the AD&D 1e PHB, I started wondering about the recent trend of "old-school gaming".

Does anyone still play versions of D&D before 3.x? Does anyone use OSRIC rules, or Hackmaster, or any other retro rulesets? Can someone explain the appeal to me?

There are versions of D&D after 2nd edition AD&D?

I'm an old-school gamer. All the way. Had 3e briefly, but sold 'em. Didn't think it was worth the $$$ I paid for it.

[Llwch]

Yes, when you initially set the character up, each of the minors can go up and down up to two points each for a spread of four. Afterward, the spread can increase, but the major stat remains the average.

A Fighter could start out with Str=16, adjusted to Str/Mus=18 and Str/Sta=14. After a few levels his Str/Mus increases to 22 while his Str/Sta remains 14. His Str would now be 18.

I presume by the above 18 scores, you're referring to 3.x D&D? I know the Player's Option series allowed scores above 18, but only so long as they were within racial maximums.

[Ed Zachary]

I presume by the above 18 scores, you're referring to 3.x D&D? I know the Player's Option series allowed scores above 18, but only so long as they were within racial maximums.

Screw the racial maximums for levels and ability scores, we never used them.

That, along with exceptional strength made zero sense.

[Farcaster]

Barring magic or technology, I would think that it makes complete sense that there are physical limits to what the human body (or elven, dwarven, etc) can do. Now, what would probably represent this better is a law of diminishing returns, which is somewhat represented in the point based system. The more points you put into a stat, the less return you get.

I did some research on this a long time ago, when I was trying to come up with a system of my own. Giving some margin, I based the upper limits for a normal human on world records for strength and intelligence. Now, when it came to the super-human characters in this world, then those limits could certainly be bypassed (but also to a limit)

[MortonStromgal]

So I like to DM AD&D and older editions for monster combat because the Monsterous Manual rocks and leveling up creatures was easier because there were less stats. However as a player I love the versitility of skills and feats etc. I think I would be happiest with something inbetween (heres to hoping 4e fits the bill)