Wednesday, August 14, 2019
In Defense of AD&D
Most modern gamers, myself included, have faulted AD&D as being a grab bag of contradictory mechanics, some poorly developed, that may or may not have been tested and that the author himself may not even have used. However, a way of excusing the material incorporated into AD&D is to not see it as a single, coherent system, but rather as the amalgamation of everything that had been published under the D&D name since the release of the original booklets, including articles from The Strategic Review, fan submitted works, and answers to frequently asked questions. In that way, AD&D can be seen as a culmination of all things D&D up to that point, whether or not Gygax himself personally used it or even thought it was a good idea. With that view, the books seem more like a gift to the budding RPG community, rather than the adversarial dictation many view it as.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I like OSRIC’s character sheet, and even though it’s missing some important fields for AD&D 1e and feels more like a B/X sheet, it’s st...
-
The DM of a group I was playing in wanted to switch over to Original Dungeons and Dragons, and shared this PDF of the 3LBBs compiled into o...
-
They're the same. The BE of BECMI is identical to B/X, intentionally so, as some passages are lifted word-for-word. There are a few mino...
-
From RPG site forums USC professor, occasional novelist, and (apparently) D&D fan Dr. J. Eric Holmes, as legend has it, took the OD&...
No comments:
Post a Comment