D&D 1E Edition Experience: Did/Do you Play 1E AD&D? How Was/Is It?

How Did/Do You Feel About 1E D&D?

  • I'm playing it right now; I'll have to let you know later.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I'm playing it right now and so far, I don't like it.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

nevin

Hero
Honestly rough rules and gygaxian contradictions aside. It was a simpler game that was far more balanced than anything released since. Assuming you left the psionics and Bards out of it. Many hate it because it had less options, many hate it because it was often run in nity gritty games with lot's of death and destruction but not all games were run that way and if you gave out xp fairly and worked out the contradictory rules it was a fairly balanced game. A fact that is often lost when people see the lower level wizard and paladin running with the higher level thief and fighter. They can't get past the modern video games where everyone has the same level. With white wolf, dragon magazine and all the other things you had by the 80's it was also a healthier, younger, happier ecosystem than this middle aged game with it's pot bellied whiney old guys and gals who are all arm chair party leaders and game designers telling us all how much better they can do it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing (He/They)
Right. This all goes to the exact same point I made- 1e suffers today because of the way that the hobby has shifted, both from the influx of the viewpoint instilled in 3e (rules) and the overall gestalt of the early 2000s in the indie game movement.

Viewing 1e in that light, it would look like a mess. However, viewing 1e in the way that it was played at the time, when it was much more of the base toolkit for the community to be expounded upon by tables, with the assistance of local and community norms, 3PP, and Dragon Magazine ... it was part of a much richer tapestry.
This is a good point.
 

Whizbang Dustyboots

Gnometown Hero
Finally, while I will continue to joke about High Gygaxian, 1e had the perfect marriage of of form to function; the act of reading and understanding the game introduced you to the idea of something new and mysterious. It was impossible to delve into the baroque and contradictory language of Gygax without starting to feel the stirrings of something greater just waiting for you. The language invited you not just to play, but also to create.
Yeah, no other edition has come close to 1E's vibes. Every edition since has come dangerously close to being a bad textbook, while Gygax's 1E books felt like forbidden tomes that were giving you a peek into something cool and mysterious.
 
Last edited:

Mannahnin

Scion of Murgen (He/Him)
Honestly rough rules and gygaxian contradictions aside. It was a simpler game that was far more balanced than anything released since.
Eh. I don't think I can grant that about balance. Especially given how one of the most common pieces of advice to new players and DMs getting into old-school play is to abandon any devotion to balance. As for simpler...


I think most folks who opine that AD&D was simple were never playing it by the book. IME a lot of folks came to AD&D from the Basic/Expert or BECMI lines and substituted simpler rules from those games for the initiative system, for example, or massively reduced the complexity of the rules by ignoring a lot of them.
 
Last edited:

ART!

Deluxe Unhuman
Played the bejeebus out of this back when it was the current edition. I couldn't list the differences between it and other editions, other than it was before the addition of things like skills, feats, subclasses - and it could be that there were things like that in AD&D and I'm just not remembering.
 

IME a lot of folks came to AD&D from the Basic/Expert or BECMI lines and substituted simpler rules from those games for the initiative system, for example, or massively reduced the complexity of the rules by ignoring a lot of them.
In my experience, I never met anyone who played Basic. But yes, no one followed every single rule in AD&D - Weapon Speed Factor and weapon type versus armor type were ignored by everyone I played with.

Every gamer I know who played AD&D started with AD&D.

Some did own and read Red Box, and of course we played adventures from Basic, but we never actually played by Basic rules - nobody I know had a character whose class was elf.

Might be an age thing. I was 9 when the PHB was published.
 

nevin

Hero
no it was freaking expensive. 20 bucks for the AD&D book 20 bucks for the GameMaster's guide. The boxed sets about the same. I think sunk costs tended to keep players in whichever group they started in.

just checked an inflation calculator. 20 bucks in 1977 was the same spending power as 104 dollars and change now. Generally whichever version someone started with they stayed with because of sunk costs. So you had to have 40 dollars or 208 equivilant todays dollars to start the game. Or do what we did and split the cost and I bought the DMG and my buddy bought the players handbook.

The game actually got cheaper they were still 20 bucks in 1984 and that was 64 modern dollars. But you had more books. in 2000 those 30ish dollar 3rd edition books were about 50 bucks in purchsing power now. The hobby got steadily cheaper with more books for those with disposable cash. The cost adjusted for inflation for full retail on books has stayed pretty level since 2000.
 


Clint_L

Legend
I voted for the first option, "I played it, and I remember liking it," even though that is WAY too moderate a description of the passionate love that I had for AD&D. I frikken memorized the core three books, and all I wanted to do was play AD&D.

That said, there's no way that it was the simplest or most balanced version of the game. I mean, not even close, IMO. It had bespoke rules and tables for everything; two thirds of which no one used, and balance was barely a consideration. A level 1 magic-user was essentially dead weight once they used their one sleep spell, paladins and rangers were just better than fighters, and so on.
 

Jelly Bean

RPG Dabbler
With all of the talk about the Golden Age of Gaming, and all of the retro-clones floating around, it's made me curious about the older editions of the game. I'm curious how many folks on ENWorld have ever played the older editions, and what their level of satisfaction was. Or is, if you are one of the rare birds that are still keeping it Old School.

This week I'd like to examine the 1st Edition of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. Have you played it before? or are you still playing it? What do you think about it?

By "played," I mean that you've been either a player or a DM for at least one gaming session. By "playing," I mean you have an ongoing gaming group that still actively plays this version, however occasionally. And for the purpose of this survey, I'm only referring to the 1st Edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons version, which was first published in 1977 and compiled by Gary Gygax. This one right here, the one with the ruby-eyed statue on the cover:

View attachment 119955

Note that this is different from the "Advanced Dungeons and Dragons" 2nd Edition, which had a knight on the cover (and the words "2nd Edition" in bold, red letters). That version was published a whole decade later.

Feel free to add nuance in your comments, but let's not have an edition war over this. I'm really just interested in hearing peoples' stories of playing the 1E rules, and what they remembered (for better or worse) about it.

Next week we will tackle the B/X, "Moldvay" version. So if that's your flavor of choice, I hope to hear from you next week.

Other Surveys
OD&D
Basic D&D
B/X D&D
BECMI / Rules Cyclopedia
AD&D 2E
D&D 3E
D&D 4E
Survey Results (24 Apr 2020)
My only comment would be that I think the golden age of gaming is right now. We have a worldwide network to contact other players and GMs, VTTs to allow games over that network and nothing stopping you playing original D&D if you want to, or the many thousands of other games.

Played AD&D 1e and liked it. Still have the books.
 

Remove ads

Top