|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 24, 2012 3:27:06 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 13:52:41 GMT -8
1e essentially created the RPG genre, for that I give it and Gygax much respect. It was also an incredibly broken system. The reason people think AD&D fostered so much creativity and imagination is because its impossible to play RAW, you had to make shit up because of just how borked the rules were. I have played a total of three 1e games in my life, each one of them was so dramatically different in how the rules were interpreted that they might as well been different systems.
People seem to think all the rules in modern games hold them back, but they forget that just like 1e you can drop rules, and add new ones at your pleasure. Just like the first addition books the modern edition tells you early on that these are guidelines and not to let them get in the way of the game. but the fact that the rules are consistent, that they don't contradict and overrule each other constantly means that you have the choice to add and change the rules, as opposed to being forced to do it just to play the damn game.
All that being said I do wish I'd picked these up. They are a part of the history of both a franchise and a genre.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 25, 2012 3:28:16 GMT -8
Gosh . . . Um . . . I just thought it was a nice review and found the comments section really funny - especially the grognard who was upset over the quality of the illustrations as digitised reprints . . . He has literally gone through every picture in the book and played 'spot the difference'
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Sept 25, 2012 4:33:14 GMT -8
1e essentially created the RPG genre, for that I give it and Gygax much respect. It was also an incredibly broken system. The reason people think AD&D fostered so much creativity and imagination is because its impossible to play RAW, you had to make shit up because of just how borked the rules were. I have played a total of three 1e games in my life, each one of them was so dramatically different in how the rules were interpreted that they might as well been different systems. People seem to think all the rules in modern games hold them back, but they forget that just like 1e you can drop rules, and add new ones at your pleasure. Just like the first addition books the modern edition tells you early on that these are guidelines and not to let them get in the way of the game. but the fact that the rules are consistent, that they don't contradict and overrule each other constantly means that you have the choice to add and change the rules, as opposed to being forced to do it just to play the damn game. All that being said I do wish I'd picked these up. They are a part of the history of both a franchise and a genre. "What follows herein is strictly for the eyes of you, the campaign referee. As the creator and ultimate authority in your respective game [later termed game "system"], this work is written as one Dungeon Master equal to another. Pronouncements there may be, but they are not from "on high" as respects your game." - E. Gary Gygax, opening to Preface, DMG AD&D 1e, emphasis by author. [Clarification mine.] This sort of talk was written into the attitude of the aptly named guide book itself, and was the framing of the entire system document, and enshrined into the "rules" itself. Unless someone believes that each book's written content was different, there is no other reasonable way to understand what Gary was saying when he wrote: As this book is the exclusive precinct of the DM, you must view any non-DM player possessing it as something less than worthy of honourable death. - Preface. Does this make a broken system? Well, aside from missing the point of the guidebook, if you think of a western RPG system as decorating your home like an Ikea store then, yes, it is broken. And Gygax is a terrible game designer. (J-RPGs may be different because I understand Asians want to live in Ikea stores.) But if you consider AD&D 1e as a guide, a toolset or a storehouse of mechanics and suggestions from which to pick and choose, like a Dim Sum menu, then no. And you have GM = System. Are GMs broken? Yes, some of them are..... Check out what it says about being a broken GM in the section Handling Difficult Players!
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 25, 2012 10:00:31 GMT -8
Eeeekk . . . It was just a nicely written and observant review that I thought was a rather pleasant read not a declaration of intent or a pre revolution OSR manifesto. If anything I got the impression the reviewer was being rather generous to all games . . . None being perfect and all able to draw lessons from each other. As they say . . . 'Don't plan for the future without first considering the lessons of the past' . . .
|
|
|
Post by stork on Sept 27, 2012 15:11:48 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 27, 2012 15:49:27 GMT -8
What a great site . . . It's like a free OSR resource library of collective ideas.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Mar 23, 2013 11:04:23 GMT -8
Stork, Tim Hutchings is in our LinkedIn group. Plagmada is in the Interesting Links there. It’s a nice initiative. I am rather disappointed with the reprints to be honest. I got the core reprints and find I still need to refer to the original books to make sure 1s are not 7s and Dwarves are 1HD creatures. The S-series reprints suffer from visions of coffee table grandeur and fail at utility. While the book looks "premium" from it's cover, keeping the paper and book mark from the core books, no care was taken to ensure a premium reproduction of the artwork from the originals, which includes the first colour printing within a module. We're talking Erol Otis artwork. Love him or leave him, his style is very distinctive of the era. So much for being a coffee table book. As for a playing aid, using the book as an actual extended module campaign, that's out of the question. The maps are scattered throughout the book and stuck within the gutters. This means, you need an Exacto knife to cut the map out and then photo copy it. These reprints cannot decide what they are supposed to be, and end up being.... nothing of value. A real shame. And then there are the typos that have Dragonsfoot abuzz with various degrees of buyer remorse. I am curious how WOTC is going to screw up their reprint of Original D&D….
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Mar 29, 2013 8:32:21 GMT -8
There were typos in the originals as well . . . depending on which printing one bought and whether or not one had access to the errata's frequently on disclosed in the 'Sage Advice' of Dragon. No interweb's back then . . . some (not all) of the typos people are upset over are actually corrections. Unearthed Arcana as originally printed had several pages of errata plus an entirely missing section (multiclass combinations etc) all of which have been included in the reprint along with a brand new players appendix for the missing section . . . well worth the reprint. NB: some (not many though) of the folk at Dragonsfoot are grognards of a different flavour, they have played the game sans errata for years and like the quirk that these errors produced: the classic being falling damage as it was always supposed to read 1d6 per 10ft per 10ft (GG released this tidbit through his 'Sorcerers Scoll' column in the early 80's) thus a fall of 20ft wasn't supposed to be 2d6 but 3d6 (1d6 for the 1st 10ft + 2d6 for the following 10ft = 3d6). As to reproducing the artwork, yeah it's shame but an unavoidable consequence of digitizing long lost artworks . . . do the originals even exist anymore and if they do what condition are they in? Exposing 30+ year old paper and ink to the harsh light of a scanner isn't recommended, not to mention that ink and paper has it's own storage problems due to acidity and fading . . . I don't imagine many of the original illustrations were commissioned with a view to their longevity being utilitarian in purpose. This probably why so many former TSR artists are setting about reproducing their lost artworks now and why Errol Otis has been able to offer original art as incentives for a certain KickStarter (suggesting that Errol Otis wisely retained ownership of his works rather than risk a LW inspired purge as was done to the contents of GG's office: thus was lost the completed manuscript for the city of Stoink, Shadowland and any hope of ever discovering exactly what a montebank would be . . . I shed no tears over the loss of the proposed Jester class however) Aaron
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on May 7, 2013 5:24:19 GMT -8
As for a playing aid, using the book as an actual extended module campaign, that's out of the question. The maps are scattered throughout the book and stuck within the gutters. This means, you need an Exacto knife to cut the map out and then photo copy it. It seems WotC awakens but slowly. Here are PDFs of the Illustrations (in B&W) taken from the reprints themselves. So now when you describe the turnstile or want to handout the notice, you can do that without needing to pass around your book or hold it in front of you like show and tell. www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4dnd/sseriesbonus#86281For over a year we have been hearing the message how the designers at WotC have been playing AD&D 1e and how the flavour of the game is going to be represented in 5e - like the Mines of Madness AP demonstrates (don't get me or jfever started) - and yet no maps are available for these books. So, reflecting upon all this insensitivity given to the actual maps, are they playing AD&D 1e with Dungeon Tiles or Battlemats? Or do they completely hand wave the Mapper player entirely out of AD&D 1e and just describe combat from room to room, house to house, alternating between a first-person life wasted on Doom and Call of Duty? I have met MBAs who have impressive academic credentials but, after I listen to them for a bit, realise they understand neither life nor business in any real practical sense. I have the same feeling here with WotC. Will we see the maps? Why such a delay? ( Who in god's name is handling their PR?!)
|
|