Comments on: Retro Gaming: AD&D 1st Edition, Part 1 http://greylotus.org/2010/02/02/retro-gaming-add-1st-edition-part-1/ RPGs and more Mon, 28 Jun 2010 17:15:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Alamar http://greylotus.org/2010/02/02/retro-gaming-add-1st-edition-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-23 Alamar Mon, 17 May 2010 15:37:50 +0000 http://greylotus.org/?p=108#comment-23 3.X multiclassing was flawed in many ways, though 3.5 tried to address front-loaded abilities. There was a cost to multiclassing in later editions, and spellcasters were hit especially hard. I would note, however, that your interpretation of the rules of multiclassing in 1e appears to differ from everyone else I've seen. A Fighter-Mage-Cleric could use cleric weapons, unless I'm misremembering. I'll check later when I have my books on hand, I forgot to load the 1st edition ones on my pad. Most of the other issues you brought up are nonexistent. Fighter-rogues have to take their armor off if they want to use their abilities well... so what? That's the price they pay for being a fighter-rogue. I played a very fun Paladin/Rogue not so long ago, and I just wore a chain shirt for my armor because that let me use rogue abilities reasonably well. I really think you're picking nits with the 3e system and ignoring the bad parts of 1e here. Even the 'dipping' you mention is discouraged in the rules by having an XP penalty for multiclassing with a gap between your classes, though I think the rules are a tad too lenient on it, what with Favored Classes and all. That said, 1e didn't have the ridiculous matter of a Fighter suddenly deciding to pick up Wizard spellcasting, while the Wizard had to spend years in apprenticeship before chargen. 3e was a phenomenal leap forward in many ways, but it wasn't without some major wallbangers. 3.X multiclassing was flawed in many ways, though 3.5 tried to address front-loaded abilities. There was a cost to multiclassing in later editions, and spellcasters were hit especially hard. I would note, however, that your interpretation of the rules of multiclassing in 1e appears to differ from everyone else I’ve seen. A Fighter-Mage-Cleric could use cleric weapons, unless I’m misremembering. I’ll check later when I have my books on hand, I forgot to load the 1st edition ones on my pad.

Most of the other issues you brought up are nonexistent. Fighter-rogues have to take their armor off if they want to use their abilities well… so what? That’s the price they pay for being a fighter-rogue. I played a very fun Paladin/Rogue not so long ago, and I just wore a chain shirt for my armor because that let me use rogue abilities reasonably well. I really think you’re picking nits with the 3e system and ignoring the bad parts of 1e here. Even the ‘dipping’ you mention is discouraged in the rules by having an XP penalty for multiclassing with a gap between your classes, though I think the rules are a tad too lenient on it, what with Favored Classes and all.

That said, 1e didn’t have the ridiculous matter of a Fighter suddenly deciding to pick up Wizard spellcasting, while the Wizard had to spend years in apprenticeship before chargen. 3e was a phenomenal leap forward in many ways, but it wasn’t without some major wallbangers.

]]> By: JoeSnow http://greylotus.org/2010/02/02/retro-gaming-add-1st-edition-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-21 JoeSnow Mon, 17 May 2010 14:58:29 +0000 http://greylotus.org/?p=108#comment-21 I have to disagree with you about multi-classing sucking in A,D&D 1st edition. It was one of my favorite aspects of the game back then and all my characters were multi-class. The system they have today where you can 'dip' one level into another class while running your other class(es) to the max is BS. The front loading of abilities and spells to make dipping more viable is also BS. What happened to starting out gimp and acquiring your abilities over time? That was part of what made the game interesting. The limitations on weapons and armor also made the game more challenging. You could be a Fighter-Magic User but were limited to cloth armor, daggers and staffs. You got bigger bonuses from using those items, though, because of your fighter nature so you would have a Magic User that had a more reasonable life expectancy than a pure Mage because his AC and to hit bonuses would be better when he ran out of spells to cast. Seriously, how realistic is it that someone can multi-class a fighter/wizard now and be able to wear their full plate armor while fighting but have to take it off when they want to cast a spell? Or a fighter-rogue who has to remove his heavy armor when doing anything stealthy? Then you have the issue of them having to carry their heavy armor and weapons around when they want to do anything outside the realm of fighting. Have you ever seen anyone putting on or removing a suit of full plate armor? It can easily take a half an hour or longer. It's not realistic to expect player characters to do that in the heat of battle. Restricting their choices is far better. I used to multi-class mostly fighter-cleric characters because clerics could still wear some of the heavier armors and the cleric limitation on blunt weapons only wasn't so bad for a fighter. I did once roll a Fighter-Magic User-Cleric that was fun because he could only use a staff (the only weapon common to all three classes) and wear cloth (magic user restriction) but could fill a multitude of roles in group. Versatility should come with a price and the price was gear restrictions and longer level up times. Characters that can do it all and still level up quickly are no challenge and no fun. You might as well switch the game to god mode if you're going to have characters that overpowered in the game. All rulesets after 1st Edition sucked tremendously. I have to disagree with you about multi-classing sucking in A,D&D 1st edition. It was one of my favorite aspects of the game back then and all my characters were multi-class. The system they have today where you can ‘dip’ one level into another class while running your other class(es) to the max is BS. The front loading of abilities and spells to make dipping more viable is also BS. What happened to starting out gimp and acquiring your abilities over time? That was part of what made the game interesting. The limitations on weapons and armor also made the game more challenging. You could be a Fighter-Magic User but were limited to cloth armor, daggers and staffs. You got bigger bonuses from using those items, though, because of your fighter nature so you would have a Magic User that had a more reasonable life expectancy than a pure Mage because his AC and to hit bonuses would be better when he ran out of spells to cast. Seriously, how realistic is it that someone can multi-class a fighter/wizard now and be able to wear their full plate armor while fighting but have to take it off when they want to cast a spell? Or a fighter-rogue who has to remove his heavy armor when doing anything stealthy? Then you have the issue of them having to carry their heavy armor and weapons around when they want to do anything outside the realm of fighting. Have you ever seen anyone putting on or removing a suit of full plate armor? It can easily take a half an hour or longer. It’s not realistic to expect player characters to do that in the heat of battle. Restricting their choices is far better. I used to multi-class mostly fighter-cleric characters because clerics could still wear some of the heavier armors and the cleric limitation on blunt weapons only wasn’t so bad for a fighter. I did once roll a Fighter-Magic User-Cleric that was fun because he could only use a staff (the only weapon common to all three classes) and wear cloth (magic user restriction) but could fill a multitude of roles in group. Versatility should come with a price and the price was gear restrictions and longer level up times. Characters that can do it all and still level up quickly are no challenge and no fun. You might as well switch the game to god mode if you’re going to have characters that overpowered in the game. All rulesets after 1st Edition sucked tremendously.

]]>