| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| John_Feaster |
Posted - 26 Apr 2013 : 11:57:04
I've been preparing to run my group in the Forgotten Realms (still using my old books, the 1987-era gray boxed set, and such) and as I start working out the basics (running in Amn, and using my battered old "Empires of the Sand" book as a resource) I decide to do a search on the internet and see if anyone else is doing anything similar. You know what I find? TONS of people running 1st edition 'Greyhawk' and their own home settings...but not much on old school 'Realms' campaigns. I'm certain I'm not the only old man doing this, but information is sparse.
As I said, I'm using my 1st edition AD&D stuff (2 Players Handbooks, DMG, Unearthed Arcana, core Monster Manuals, Fiend Folio and both Wilderness Guides), and am setting the campaign in Amn, so as to sidestep the well-trod and far too familiar lands of Waterdeep, Dales, Cormyr and Sembia that everyone's used to. I've adapted some old Dungeon Magazine adventures to the setting (low level stuff like "Roarwater Caves" and "Whitelake Mines" by Willie Walsh) and prep a couple of utility NPC's to run with them if need be (a half-orc Thief named 'Tulgan of Trademeet' and a female dwarven Cleric of Lathander named 'Elodia Capella', who was raised by humans).
So...is anyone else doing anything like this? Running a Realms campaign with old AD&D? |
| 12 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 24 May 2013 : 19:44:43
quote:
Originally posted by mhensley
I've been thinking of running a FR game with 1e rules but I only have the 2e FR box set. Does the 1e box set have any rules for creating characters? FR seems a lot more open to demi human pc's than Greyhawk or the 1e rule book allows. Level limit seem like they should be higher and some classes should be opened up for demi humans.
Not that I recall.
There really wasn't much difference between 1E and 2E, in terms of rulesets. |
| mhensley |
Posted - 24 May 2013 : 15:06:17
I've been thinking of running a FR game with 1e rules but I only have the 2e FR box set. Does the 1e box set have any rules for creating characters? FR seems a lot more open to demi human pc's than Greyhawk or the 1e rule book allows. Level limit seem like they should be higher and some classes should be opened up for demi humans. |
| froglegg |
Posted - 20 May 2013 : 01:29:20
The last one I ran.
http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=44334
John |
| Vaeldroth |
Posted - 29 Apr 2013 : 19:07:08
Also using 2nd edition here, though I had my players go through a portal from Greyhawk to the Realms, so they know nothing of the setting. I actually converted from 1e because I don't like dealing with the non-linear to-hit charts, and the book organization is better. I also like having Battlesystem as an option for large battles, and using base sizes for tactical combat. My players also happened to have books for 2nd. I use the OGB and FRA for setting material, along with the (I have come to find) indispensable Elminster's Forgotten Realms. EFR is the best I've seen at describing the culture and customs of the Realms.
I was going to go into detail about why I don't use 4e, but I would say that 4e encourages a certain kind of play style focused on character building and combat that I do not like. Yes, you can role play with it. I agree, and I have. I wouldn't say it's WoW. |
| Derulbaskul |
Posted - 29 Apr 2013 : 13:26:21
I've been thinking about a simpler ruleset that I may be able to use to introduce my son (when he's a bit older) and my wife's family to D&D and I keep thinking about AD&D, either 1E or 2E. However, I'm a huge fan of Swords & Wizardry - largely because of its better organisation of 1E's Gygaxian ramblings - and think that would probably better suit me/us better. That said, I hate, loathe and detest generic clerics with a passion so whatever simply ruleset I choose I will be making some effort to create deity-specific cleric classes, sub-classes or specialty priests.
(Honestly, 4E is Warcraft? Isn't everyone tired of that crap already? I run a 4E game. We have roleplaying in it. We have exciting combats. We have nothing that, as far as I am aware, makes it seem like a MMORPG. And you know what? We had the same things when we played Dragon Quest and Red Box D&D 32 years ago.)
|
| vorpalanvil |
Posted - 28 Apr 2013 : 08:39:14
And as far as "Old Men" go, I'm 34. |
| vorpalanvil |
Posted - 28 Apr 2013 : 08:38:11
I have been running a 2ed campaign using a liberal smattering of material from the Player's Option books ( mostly the initiative and basic combat rules ). I spent years trying to fix the misbalanced rules and terrible classes under D20 based on the old rules set. I finally realized one day that I could just play under those rules. Best DMing decision of my life by far. I am currently running my second campaign with this group based in the early 1360's and loving every minute of it and the rule set. I do use a bit of 3rd ED material for roleplaying and geographical information, such as the Silver Marches book and map. My decision to run this system wasn't based on nostalgia for the old days but the desire for a system that fit the feel and spirit of Dungeons and Dragons. Six years and running I haven't regretted a minute of it and have converted many a D20 fan to the beauty and complexity of AD&D, with it's many quirks and wrinkles. I can't imagine playing a swords and sorcery paper and dice game under any other set of rules. Well met! |
| crazedventurers |
Posted - 27 Apr 2013 : 17:34:24
quote:
Originally posted by John_Feaster
As I said, I'm using my 1st edition AD&D stuff (2 Players Handbooks, DMG, Unearthed Arcana, core Monster Manuals, Fiend Folio and both Wilderness Guides),
I've adapted some old Dungeon Magazine adventures to the setting (low level stuff like "Roarwater Caves" and "Whitelake Mines" by Willie Walsh) an
So...is anyone else doing anything like this? Running a Realms campaign with old AD&D?
Aye certainly am, we are actually using the Castles and Crusades ruleset as a base for the character classes with massive amounts of 1E loveliness added to the game. S0 I am using all the 1E books and the crossover ones as well (The Greyhawk hardback 1E-2E, bits from the Dragonlance modules) plus tons of chopped up and reintegrated modules as well as home brew adventures and stuff from Dungeon and interestingly Willie Walsh's stuff featured heavily early on in the ongoing campaign as it is class work.
Good luck with the game
Cheers
Damian
|
| Renin |
Posted - 27 Apr 2013 : 03:32:46
I left WOTC for Pathfinder once they made DnD into Warcraft.
However, there is a lot of rules that are huge, and potentially encumbering with PF. Too often, it becomes a Final Fantasy game, where someone hits for 9999 and then gets healed for 9999. PF really just insanely can push and push and push damage up ridiculously so.
I continually work with changing the rules, and adapting to my group(s). My latest push is to bring Reaction Adjustment for Charisma from AD&D back, to actually create a need for CHR stats in my adventures. I also miss the 'parry' ability. |
| John_Feaster |
Posted - 26 Apr 2013 : 21:05:44
I had no real problem with 2nd edition. I liked some of the changes (thieves choosing how to spemd their points and such) but didn't like the way 'Mommy' held my 'wittle hand' and 'pwotected' me from scary things like Demons, Devils, Assassins and Half-Orcs. 2nd edition tried too hard to please people who didn't PLAY the game.
3rd had it's charms, and I took a deep breath and bought all the books I felt I needed (source books and such, but no adventures) , but combat became MUCH more complex (I hate when I have to use miniatures) and role playing began to take a back seat to the rules.
Then...3.5...and for the first time, I just...stopped. My weekly game becames Call of Cthulhu, Gamma World, Torg (still running my Torg campaign) a homebrew GURPS campaign set in hell, and so on. 4th editin came out with no impact, though I didn't like the 'Warcraft' feeling to the game, and I HATED the changes to the setting. THAT isn't the Realms, my friend.
5th? Why? Maybe it'll be better...but it'll never be necessary, so I don't suppose I'll be buying it. Well...maybe. Nostalgia is a powerful thing. But...the old stuff still works, and I know it by heart.
Old 'Dragon Magazine' options and such that I'm using include "Good Hits & Bad Misses" from issue 39, Cantrips ("Orisons") for Clerics and Druids, "A cast of strange familiars" and so on like that. |
| Caladan Brood |
Posted - 26 Apr 2013 : 19:00:12
I play AD&D using the 2nd ed box set (1366 DR). Only two sessions so far but I'm having a blast reacquainting myself with the setting by finishing the collection after fifteen-twenty years being .. forgotten. Kind of. |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 26 Apr 2013 : 17:06:44
I have not played AD&D, but I read this interesting article today that you might find interesting: http://diceofdoom.com/blog/2013/04/the-foresight-of-my-fathers-adnd-1st-ed-house-rules/ |
|
|
