I should define my terms. "Classic" D&D has been defined as the line of Holmes Basic, Moldvay-Cook Basic/Expert, Mentzer BECMI, RC D&D. But I prefer a slightly more nuanced definition. Because BECMI/RC are so expansive they are almost a beast unto themselves. Mentzer B/X is also a classic era game, but played with Companion and up, or the Rule Cyclopedia, it is a more complex extension of the game, much like Advanced.Whereas Holmes and Moldvay-Cook are much more of a reflection of Original D&D. This, in my mind, is the classic age of the game. From original into the basic and expert lines, which essentially cover a refined version of the original game. The supplements, in terms of additional classes, race as class, variable weapon damage, etc. can easily be ported into the the basic game, to give a late original+supplements feel. So to be concise, playing "advanced" like Labyrinth Lord AEC, is basically classic D&D. Hence a sheep in wolves clothing. And, I posit, what a lot of people do with AD&D 1e.
Now I'm not overplaying the sheep-wolf thing, I mean there's not value bestowed here. It may seem like I'm splitting hairs, or being purist, and I am sort of, but all in an effort to more deeply understand what it is we do once a twice a week on Thursday or Saturday night. Classic isn't a sheep anymore than AD&D is a wolf, or vice versa. But, see, D&D is more of a continuum up through 3e. On one end of the continuum there is the original game, which truthfully can't really be played as written because it's so hard to read. So lots of people made stuff up, houseruled it and worked it into something resembling what we know as D&D. AD&D, as well as the Basic+ lines come along and it makes the rules more clear and cohesive. We are now all playing basically the same game, some with a few rules variations in turning power, cleric spells at first level, race as class, paladins and other subclasses or not, all of these little variations, but we really aren't playing AD&D.
I mean, sure, we might have called friends together and said we are playing basic, or more likely just D&D, and we might have different editions, but we would agree elf is a class, you can't be an elf thief, or whatever. arguments might ensue, and we would clear up that we were playing basic rules, or advanced rules or whatever. But it didn't make that much difference. And the majority of the people I knew who were playing AD&D were not playing AD&D RAW. I think those people were very few and far between. It is more common now, as older grogs get back into the game, or newer gamers want to know what all the old fuss was about and try the old games. That's when we start thinking about playing with all the rules, or at least try to abide by most of them.
In the first few pages to the Dungeon Masters' Guide, most notably on pages 7 and 9, Gary Gygax speaks to the nature of AD&D as a game system. These passages are liberally quoted now when such discussions arise. It clearly says that Gary says the DM is the ultimate arbiter and will decide what rules they use and what rules they don't. But, I feel, that case is often overstated. What they fail to see or quote as regularly are the injunctions to abide by and trust the system first;
"Dictums are given for the sake of the game only, for if ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS is to survive and grow, it must have some degree of uniformity, a familiarity of method and procedure from campaign to campaign within the whole. ADVANCED D&D is more than a framework around which individual DMs construct their respective milieux, it is above all a set of boundaries for all of the "worlds" devised by referees everywhere. These boundaries are broad and spacious, and there are numerous areas where they are so vague and amorphous as to make them nearly nonexistent, but they are there nonetheless." (7)
"In this lies a great danger, however. The systems and parameters contained in the whole of ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS are based on a great deal of knowledge, experience
gained through discussion, play, testing, questioning, and (hopefully) personal insight." (7)
"Limitations, checks, balances, and all the rest are placed into the system in order to assure that what is based thereon will be a superior campaign, a campaign which offers the most interesting play possibilities to the greatest number of participants for the longest period of time possible." (7)
"These facts are of prime importance, for they underlie many rules." (7)
"With certain uniformity of systems and "laws", players will be able to move from one campaign to another and know at least the elemental principles which govern the new milieu, for all milieux will have certain (but not necessarily the same) laws in common. Character races and classes will be nearly the same. Character ability scores will have the identical meaning - or nearly so. Magic spells will function in a certain manner regardless of which world the player is functioning in. Magic devices will certainly vary, but their principles will be similar. This uniformity will help not only players, it will enable DMs to carry on a meaningful dialogue and exchange of useful information." (7)
"The danger of a mutable system is that you or your players will go too far in some undesirable direction and end up with a short-lived campaign." (7)
"Similarly, you must avoid the tendency to drift into areas foreign to the game as a whole. Such campaigns become so strange as to be no longer "AD&D". They are isolated and will usually wither. Variation and difference are desirable, but both should be kept within the boundaries of the overall system." (7)
"Keep such individuality in perspective by developing a unique and detailed world based on the rules of ADVANCED D&D." (7)
"It is incumbent upon all DMs to be thoroughly conversant with the PLAYERS HANDBOOK, and at the same time you must also know the additional information which is given in this volume, for it rounds out and completes the whole." (9)
"I have attempted is to cram everything vital to the game into this book, so that you will be as completely equipped as possible to face the ravenous packs of players lurking in the shadows, waiting to pounce upon the unwary referee and devour him or her at the first opportunity." (9)
"Thus, besides the systems, I have made every effort to give the reasoning and justification for the game." (9)
"And while there are no optionals for the major systems of ADVANCED D&D (for uniformity of rules and procedures from game to game, campaign to campaign, is stressed), there are plenty of areas where your own creativity and imagination are not bounded by the parameters of the game system. These are sections where only a few hints and suggestions are given, and the rest left to the DM." (9)
"Read how and why the system is as if is, follow the parameters, and then cut portions as needed to maintain excitement. For example, the rules call for wandering monsters ... Wandering monsters, however, are included for two reasons, as is explained in the section about them." (9)
"Know the game systems, and you will know how and when to take upon yourself the ultimate power. To become the final arbiter, rather than the interpreter of the rules, can be a difficult and demanding task, and it cannot be undertaken lightly, for your players expect to play this game, not one made up on the spot." (9)
"Remembering that the game is greater than its parts, and knowing all of the parts, you will have overcome the greater part of the challenge of being a referee." (9)
I could comment on each emphasized portion, but I think they are clear enough, and also illustrate that while there are comments encouraging individual creativity, inspiration and even rule deletion at times, there are at least as many if not more injunctions to follow the game system and play the rules as written. I personally think, and it is back up in some of the quotes above that the modifications of which he is speaking are largely in regards to monsters, treasures, even spells (as long as the general structure and principles of such additions are in line with those presented within the game) can be added, changed or deleted. And yes such rules as grappling, even weapon armor and speed factors might be eliminated to "keep up excitement" I believe that they too were written carefully for portions and elements of the game where other options were rejected. And as he explained in the quote about rolling for wandering monsters, the rule wasn't ejected wholesale, it was allowed that the DM could determine, based on the reasons given for such rolls in the text itself were considered, to use or not use given a set of circumstances such as Gygax outlines.
Now, this is not to say that such a rules arbitrary game could not be played. It is quite regularly. I have drafted such rules myself. Only that, as mentioned above, "it becomes so strange as to not become AD&D." Call this the purist interpretation if you will. After all, you can play whatever you like at your table and even call it what you like. But let's call a sheep a sheep and a wolf a wolf. Otherwise in our zeal to appeal to others that they come join us play AD&D, we lose what AD&D really is.
No comments:
Post a Comment