My synopsis of his response is that all of the D&D editions had drawbacks. First edition AD&D was imbalanced and complicated because all of the classes had separate rules. They leveled at different rates. You had to refer to a table to determine whether or not attacks succeeded. The later editions tried to fix these problems by making the game more balanced, but they ultimately failed in the attempt. Second edition AD&D is more convoluted. Third (3.5) edition streamlined some of the work by getting rid of the THAC0 table and made the classes somewhat more balanced. The imbalance problem is still there, however, and once characters are about level 7, the game becomes so imbalanced that it is nearly unplayable.
I'd played 3.5 and felt that the rules were extremely confusing compared to fourth edition, so I didn't want to go down that route. Since Carl mentioned that he was interested in trying to run a first edition AD&D campaign again, I decided that maybe this is what I should try as well.
I went to a bookstore and bought some cheap used copies of the books, and spent the next couple of weeks perusing them. I downloaded the OSRIC rules from the internet and looked through them. I started listening to the Roll for Initiative podcast, which deals solely with 1st edition.
When I felt like I was finally ready to DM (or at least attempt), I played through some solo sessions with my friend, Nate. These didn't go too badly, but I found myself frustrated with the combat system. All of the special powers were gone, which was a major plus, but I couldn't stand having to keep looking for the right table when it came to determining attacks. It was just too bulky. The D20 system did a great job in making a straightforward combat model.
If I slogged through the inexperience and became very familiar with the rules, this system would probably work for me. However, I just feel like I don't want to get into it. I've yearned for a simple, straightforward system, and I think I may just build my own.
0 comments:
Post a Comment