I'm directing this particularly at the seasoned veterans of our community who were around for 1e and 2e. First, I'd like to say that the game has come a long way, and I am envious of you guys who were there to witness the birth of the "game". I'd give my ioun stones just to sit at a table in nostalgialand and play a game of AD&D with GG himself. Digressing, I am, in a few hours, about to get a Pathfinder CRB and Bestiary in the mail and am about to put out here a bit of a fantasy of mine. Currently, I have no access to any AD&D material, but I would like some advice on how to give my game the old school feel. I'd like to have the same race/class limitations as well. I am a 22 year old hoping to run this game for some older gentlemen who played AD&D when it first came out. I know the experience will be a little different, given the different ruleset, but what can I do to make my game as retro as possible? I hope I have clarified my mission and question throughly. If I haven't, please help me to do so.
EDIT: Perhaps. I could take the bard back to its druidic roots and make it a PrC, and do the same for the Ranger and Paladin for starters.
I'm thinking 2e AD&D for my basis of retro.
|
Well, it depends. I got started with 2e, and I remember how excited I was about 3e when it first came out. Replacing THAC0 with BAB and all that - many things in 3e are a lot "saner" in design. Likewise, PF makes some parts of 3e "saner", like cross-class skills.
On the other hand, 2e did have a certain grungy feel to it that I sometimes miss. 3e and forwards have an "everything can be fixed" sentiment in it - any injury can eventually be repaired, any ability damage and drain cured, and so forth.
It would help if you can point out what aspects of 2e you like, then we can figure out how to achieve that effect in PF.
I'm directing this particularly at the seasoned veterans of our community who were around for 1e and 2e. First, I'd like to say that the game has come a long way, and I am envious of you guys who were there to witness the birth of the "game". I'd give my ioun stones just to sit at a table in nostalgialand and play a game of AD&D with GG himself. Digressing, I am, in a few hours, about to get a Pathfinder CRB and Bestiary in the mail and am about to put out here a bit of a fantasy of mine. Currently, I have no access to any AD&D material, but I would like some advice on how to give my game the old school feel. I'd like to have the same race/class limitations as well. I am a 22 year old hoping to run this game for some older gentlemen who played AD&D when it first came out. I know the experience will be a little different, given the different ruleset, but what can I do to make my game as retro as possible? I hope I have clarified my mission and question throughly. If I haven't, please help me to do so.
EDIT: Perhaps. I could take the bard back to its druidic roots and make it a PrC, and do the same for the Ranger and Paladin for starters.
One word of advice - if you want class/race restrictions, don't implement level limits. They don't make much sense for PF. They didn't even make that much sense for AD&D except to make sure that all high level non-thief characters were humans.
I'm one of those old school gamers who's history dates back to 1980.
Recently I tried playing the "Village of Hommlet" with some friends to rediscover the "feel of the old days" and I came away with one major revelation:
I did not miss that style of play at all.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm not seeking to emulate it completely...maybe I'm just some mystified punk looking for a taste of unknown nostalgia.
One word of advice - if you want class/race restrictions, don't implement level limits. They don't make much sense for PF. They didn't even make that much sense for AD&D except to make sure that all high level non-thief characters were humans.I'm directing this particularly at the seasoned veterans of our community who were around for 1e and 2e. First, I'd like to say that the game has come a long way, and I am envious of you guys who were there to witness the birth of the "game". I'd give my ioun stones just to sit at a table in nostalgialand and play a game of AD&D with GG himself. Digressing, I am, in a few hours, about to get a Pathfinder CRB and Bestiary in the mail and am about to put out here a bit of a fantasy of mine. Currently, I have no access to any AD&D material, but I would like some advice on how to give my game the old school feel. I'd like to have the same race/class limitations as well. I am a 22 year old hoping to run this game for some older gentlemen who played AD&D when it first came out. I know the experience will be a little different, given the different ruleset, but what can I do to make my game as retro as possible? I hope I have clarified my mission and question throughly. If I haven't, please help me to do so.
EDIT: Perhaps. I could take the bard back to its druidic roots and make it a PrC, and do the same for the Ranger and Paladin for starters.
I will NOT be implementing level limits at all. That's one thing I don't find attractive..or THAC0...that sounds a little scary and backwards, having been bottle fed 3.x and only reading 2e books but never playing them.
Well, it depends. I got started with 2e, and I remember how excited I was about 3e when it first came out. Replacing THAC0 with BAB and all that - many things in 3e are a lot "saner" in design. Likewise, PF makes some parts of 3e "saner", like cross-class skills.
On the other hand, 2e did have a certain grungy feel to it that I sometimes miss. 3e and forwards have an "everything can be fixed" sentiment in it - any injury can eventually be repaired, any ability damage and drain cured, and so forth.
It would help if you can point out what aspects of 2e you like, then we can figure out how to achieve that effect in PF.
Honestly, The overall feel of it. I really can't explain it having not been there to play it. I've watched it played most of my life, though I noone ever offered to let me play. There was an...air about it that feels instinctively different. I feel like i'm trying to catch an invisible stalker blindfolded with my bare hands.
If you're looking for "grunge", You need to be a bit more specific about what exactly you mean? IF it's atmosphere, that's something that's very independent of system, residing in the presentation of your setting and the NPCs that populate it. If you mean gritty, keep your campaign to low levels (NOT E6!), and your point buys low, and be super strict in how you interpret the grey and not so grey areas of magic.
I think you hit the nail on the head, although I would like to have the racial/class restrictions along with making the bard more PrC-like and druidy (<= it isn't a word, but it is on the internet now, so it must be a word). The same would have to go for the Pally and Ranger. Low point buy would be fantastic, but I have not seen a single group that hasn't grumbled when the hear "15 point buy". Sure, you won't be a Mystic Thurge, but you can still kill that CR 5 black dragon. <.<
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I will NOT be implementing level limits at all. That's one thing I don't find attractive..or THAC0...that sounds a little scary and backwards, having been bottle fed 3.x and only reading 2e books but never playing them.
THAC0 was ok for its day since it freed us from having to look up the attack result on a table, but there's no doubt in my mind that turning the bonuses around for armor and using BAB instead is a usability improvement. It simply is one.
I think a couple of important elements of old school styles of play are:
1) DM controls the presence of most magic items
1.1) Magic item creation isn't accomplished with just a feat, cash, and time but with special items, mostly likely quested for
2) Dice rolls for many checks like searches and interactions occur after the player describes his search or interaction and the DM should override the results rolled (if poor) but the description was good enough that the attempt should succeed. For example, if there's a clue stuck between the bed and the wall and the player says he'll move the bed to search there - the search for that clue should be an auto success. If he just says "I"m searching around the bed", then leave it up to the die roll to determine if his searching skills were good enough to entail moving the bed to search that specific area.
This is a way to encourage players to approach the game in an old school style while not entirely giving up being able to use the mechanics to play a character with different abilities from the player.
3) Challenges aren't always based on "appropriate" levels. Lots of old adventures had encounters that were really tough mixed with weak ones, and as wandering monsters too. That variation in pacing is good.
4) Encourage quick encounter resolution with some off-grid encounters. If the encounter is fairly weak or there are only a couple of creatures on one side of it, don't use a battle grid. Use description and approximations - maybe drawing John Madden-like lines and arrows on a small whiteboard (a local educational supply company sells notebook sized ones - very useful). One of the reasons 4e (and some claim 3e/PF) is particularly unsuitable for wandering monsters is because individual encounters take too long to resolve. Cut the time and quick fights work better - and one way to cut time is to cut out fussiness about battle grids.
I will NOT be implementing level limits at all. That's one thing I don't find attractive..or THAC0...that sounds a little scary and backwards, having been bottle fed 3.x and only reading 2e books but never playing them.THAC0 was ok for its day since it freed us from having to look up the attack result on a table, but there's no doubt in my mind that turning the bonuses around for armor and using BAB instead is a usability improvement. It simply is one.
I think a couple of important elements of old school styles of play are:
1) DM controls the presence of most magic items
1.1) Magic item creation isn't accomplished with just a feat, cash, and time but with special items, mostly likely quested for2) Dice rolls for many checks like searches and interactions occur after the player describes his search or interaction and the DM should override the results rolled (if poor) but the description was good enough that the attempt should succeed. For example, if there's a clue stuck between the bed and the wall and the player says he'll move the bed to search there - the search for that clue should be an auto success. If he just says "I"m searching around the bed", then leave it up to the die roll to determine if his searching skills were good enough to entail moving the bed to search that specific area.
This is a way to encourage players to approach the game in an old school style while not entirely giving up being able to use the mechanics to play a character with different abilities from the player.3) Challenges aren't always based on "appropriate" levels. Lots of old adventures had encounters that were really tough mixed with weak ones, and as wandering monsters too. That variation in pacing is good.
4) Encourage quick encounter resolution with some off-grid encounters. If the encounter is fairly weak or there are only a couple of creatures on one side of it, don't use a battle grid. Use description and approximations - maybe drawing John Madden-like...
I'm actually thinking about making my own map pieces and going gridless, having been inspired by some guy on Youtube...his channel is theDMsCraft, I think.
As far as #3 is concerned, how could I factor that in with CR and should I go for slow, medium, or fast XP advancement?
Maybe you could base your adventures and/or setting on your fondest memories of your AD&D days.
You might go even further than that. You say that you have no access to any AD&D material, but if you really liked a particular old module or old version of a setting (e.g. the 1st-edition version of World of Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms) you can get used copies of old materials, often at reasonable prices, from 3rd-party sellers through amazon.com, or from nobleknight.com, hitpointe.com, dragonstrove.com, or even right here at paizo.com. (I should mention that I've never ordered anything from dragonstrove.com, so I can't personally vouch for it.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am trying to build an old school feel game myself and I find half the work is in the mindset. The players can't be obsessed with builds and have to be adventure focused. Also I would just ditch all the wealth by level guidelines. Also build encounters based the current PC's abilities and strength and forget the CR system, the way we used to before 3E. I'd also restict access to magic items and crafting. But in the end it comes down to a meta conversation as a group that everyone should be trying for the same feel.
Maybe you could base your adventures and/or setting on your fondest memories of your AD&D days.
You might go even further than that. You say that you have no access to any AD&D material, but if you really liked a particular old module or old version of a setting (e.g. the 1st-edition version of World of Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms) you can get used copies of old materials, often at reasonable prices, from 3rd-party sellers through amazon.com, or from nobleknight.com, hitpointe.com, dragonstrove.com, or even right here at paizo.com. (I should mention that I've never ordered anything from dragonstrove.com, so I can't personally vouch for it.)
There's an idea Aaron...Personally, I'm think Mystara, having come into contact with an old D&D Tower of Doom Cabinet (For which I got to play FOR FREE!!!!!!! The arcade owner and two random dudes and I killed Flamewing! Woot for being the Cleric.)
EDIT: @Sardonic Soul: Yeah, you've got to break the powergamers and number crunchers. The guys I hope to GM for a ALL about the adventure, something that was instilled in me growing up. I used to watch them play, them my friends and I would go outside and act out their game using our own "characters". The joys of being a little kid.
Maybe you could base your adventures and/or setting on your fondest memories of your AD&D days.
You might go even further than that. You say that you have no access to any AD&D material, but if you really liked a particular old module or old version of a setting (e.g. the 1st-edition version of World of Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms) you can get used copies of old materials, often at reasonable prices, from 3rd-party sellers through amazon.com, or from nobleknight.com, hitpointe.com, dragonstrove.com, or even right here at paizo.com. (I should mention that I've never ordered anything from dragonstrove.com, so I can't personally vouch for it.)
Hey, I've been watching the DMscraft to. That dude can build anithing with a glue gun and cardboard. His fountain video is really awesome.
Hey, I've been watching the DMscraft to. That dude can build anithing with a glue gun and cardboard. His fountain video is really awesome.Maybe you could base your adventures and/or setting on your fondest memories of your AD&D days.
You might go even further than that. You say that you have no access to any AD&D material, but if you really liked a particular old module or old version of a setting (e.g. the 1st-edition version of World of Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms) you can get used copies of old materials, often at reasonable prices, from 3rd-party sellers through amazon.com, or from nobleknight.com, hitpointe.com, dragonstrove.com, or even right here at paizo.com. (I should mention that I've never ordered anything from dragonstrove.com, so I can't personally vouch for it.)
My group is the same group from my 2E days but over time the 3E+ build focus and arcane accounting slowly stole that adventure feel from the game. We like the system and character options but we're looking to get that old feel back. When we reminisce about the old days it's wasn't about the builds and gear. It was about deeds and the adventure. We recently made a pact to get back to that mindset.
Personally, I'm think Mystara...My goodness. Back in my childhood, I didn't play AD&D. Instead, I got the Basic, Expert and Companion sets, and modules for those. I knew nothing at the time about Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms. So why, when I getting nostalgic about old school games, didn't I think of Mystara?!?
I think it is time to go search the internets for Mystara info.
*dons chainmail and picks up masterwork mace*
|
It's a lot of tweaking, but 2nd edition was a lot of "metagaming," wherein you didn't have a diplomacy score and had to role-play out the encounter without a foundation of how skilled one was in fast-talk. You should do away with any skills and feats that can be roleplayed.
Death occurred at 0 hit points (negative hit points was only an option, not a rule). I'd go without anything but the core rulebook as well, to keep things simpler. The focus should be less on the rules and building the "ultimate" character and moreso on the roleplay. People went through a lot more characters in 2nd edition because death came a lot quicker; consider whether your players are ok with this (because 3rd edition worked on fixing this specific complaint, it's not fun rolling up a new character every other session).
2E adventures should be less about success with dice and more about decision making. The Dungeon magazine "challenge of champion" series are a good example of using player ingenuity to have their characters solve problems. 2E also forced players to adapt to the magic items that came to them and didn't have easy crafting. If crafting is allowed, I'd limit the # of items one could craft, but simultaneously allow a character to "switch" crafting feats once one has been exhausted.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
THAC0 isn't that difficult. You just subtract their AC from your THAC0 to find your target number. Got a THAC0 of 19 and attacking an AC3 enemy? You need a modified 16 to hit. I find it funny when people whine about THAC0, yet Pathfinder has AC bonus, Dodge bonus, Luck bonus, Natural bonus, yada yada.
+ infinity. THAC0 is simple as hell. It takes more time by far to sort through all of Pathfinder's bonuses, conditional modifiers, etc than it does to do the substration for THAC0 that most of us learned how to do in first grade.
Honestly if you want to have 3.x/PF with a 2e feel you just need to make a couple of tweaks.
1) Make Casting Slower- Extend the casting action of most spells to full round actions. If there is no move and shoot (unless the Wizard is riding a mount which has it's own complications) and the casters are limited to 5' steps then wizarding is much riskier. Gank the squishy mage becomes a much more reasonable task. No Quicken spell at all.
2) Make martial types more mobile- If you don't want full move + full attack then go with a partial move that you can split attacks anywhere in between. Move 10' swing a sword move 5' more and swing another time.
3) Consider eliminating AoOs- they slow combat down
4) Consider revising Iterative attacks- I like the Trailblazer revision (2 attacks at a diminishing penalty).
5) Revise save progressions - 1/2 HD + 2 for favored save is a nice progression. This is nice for removing the ever present cloak of resistance from the game.
6) Boost Evocation- it rocked on toast in 2e, it sucks in 3.x/PF
A couple of things.
1) Ability scores were more important in 2E. Basically, you didn't get a bonus unless you had at least a 15. That means that you had to FOCUS your scores to do well...none of this 12 granting a +1 and 14 a +2!
2) The only ability score buffable by spells was Strength. All other ability scores required magic items, and then for a +1. Generally speaking, Girdles of Giant Strength were the only way to get truly inhuman numbers in ANY stat. So, you'd have to cap the price for non-Str bonus items at +2, and inflate the price wildly to reflect rarity of all stat booster items (Str at least double, other stats x10 or 40k each).
3) Ability scores were capped at 18ish for humans and 19-20ish for demihumans. Only magic items let you get beyond that point.
4) Non fighters were fragile and couldn't fight. Nobody except fighters got more then +2 hp/hd, and it took a 15 Con to get a +1. FIghters ALWAYS ended up with more hit points. I recommend capping fighters and barbs at any bonus, rangers, rogues and paladins at +4, and all others at +2. They could get the fort save bonus, but not the hit points. They were squishy.
5)Clerics had 2/3 BAB, Rogues 1/2 and Wizards 1/3. Non fighter classes were SQUISHY. I recommend you let rogues have 3/4 and use the BAB for the other two to drive the point home.
6) Monsters didn't get Con bonuses. This meant they tended to die a lot easier in melee. They also didn't get Str bonuses to hit and to damage, so PC's lived longer.
7) You could move and get all your attacks. There were no iteratives. And unless you were TWF, only Melee types got multiple attacks.
8) Making magic items was a high level thing (12+). even potions! Buying magic items was nearly unthinkable.
9) No ability score gains by level, since it would quickly break the caps. As a substitute, I propose you give them +1 or +2 to their LOWEST stat, instead.
10) Magic users had to roll to UNDERSTAND spells, and were LIMITED in the number of spells they could learn. Limits are good, make people think. Until you somehow manage to get that 19 Int (only possible with wishes or a Gem of Insight).
11) Melees had the equivalent of Best Save Progression (but didn't get the +2 bonus to start with). Clerics had great opening progression for Fort and Will stuff, but Poor progression. Mages had Great vs Spells, and sucked at the rest. Rogues got great for anything involving agility, and sucked at the rest.
12) The nature of saving throws meant magic was very powerful at low level, and got progressively less effective as characters levelled and their saves improved., since spells didn't have escalating DC's.
13) Rings/cloaks of protection affected AC and Saves.
14) level 10 was high enough level to justify having a +5 Holy Avenger, if you were a paladin!
15) Only clerics got bonus spells. Their spell list was MUCH smaller. No domains. Much tighter weapon choice.
16) weapon spec for fighters, if taken twice, was a +3/+3 AND advanced attack by +1/2 per round. It was WAY more powerful then 3.5.
17) Bonuses to hit were precious. halve the bonuses to hit for Str and Dex in melee combat. Maybe penalize monster AC by a point or three. Oh, and monsters didn't get Dex to AC, either.
The gist of all this was: Melee was far more important and powerful in 2E. they were the only ones who could truly melee effectively, sit there and take it. In the end, they were the best tanks and only tanks, and magic, while powerful, was less effective at higher level because the odds of saving against it went up dramatically. And since monsters saved as fighters, they had great saves at higher levels. terrain control, buffing and direct damage were more and more important, save or suck/die spells simply didn't work reliably.
The 1e and 2e universe were much more melee friendly. Also, classes tended to be balanced by level acquisition. You could easily have a 7/11 fighter-mage adventuring alongside 15th level characters. A level 18 archmage would have a level 21 fighter and level 23 rogue and level 22 cleric along as companions, and everyone pulled their own weight.
A 1e 'feel' has the following characteristics:
Much more emphasis/power for melees.
Much less emphasis on non direct damage spellcasters.
Spellcasters and non-melees died far more easily.
Spellcasting peaked at about 7th, and then got rapidly less effective because of the way saves worked.
The chips fell where they may. If the characters fought something above their power level, they died. 'Realism', such as it was, was important. If you were stupid, you died.
And, oh yeah, ENERGY DRAIN was terrifying, and there was virtually no way to get rid of it. Poke, level gone. You want it back, go adventure.
===Aelryinth
@Zahir
5.) Half-Orcs are Half-Orcs. You gotta remember what it was like when the game first came out. My first image of breasts was of the Succubus in the MM. XD Things were...different about 30 years ago. Just think, all those prudes would be saying we worship the devil.
*Disclaimer: The next section is somewhat rambling...
Digressing (if you can call it that...I do), Dwarven women have beards in my games, period. If you play a female dwarf without a beard, you are considered a freak of nature and not a dwarf. This is an important topic. I still dunno how I will handle multiclassing. If I DO give monsters a levels, it would probably be only one or two levels in an NPC class if anything. I think I'll keep the negative hit point rule in and just run a 15 point buy with the "traditional" race/class restrictions.
I've already got almost a whole kingdom mapped out as I await the arrival of my books like a giddy child...my wife sewed me a new dice bag for Xmas, this is the second part of my gift from her.
@Pax
How do I know how to do it? Did you Miyagi me or something?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For AD&D 2nd Ed "emulation":
Race/class limitations (note where I write the word "mage" that is a universalist wizard, but you could probably also go arcane bloodline sorcerer if you like):
Humans can be any class and can multi into a second class.
Dwarves can be clerics, fighters, and rogues. They can multiclass as a fighter/cleric or fighter/rogue only.
Elves can be clerics, fighters, mage, rogues or rangers. Multiclass options: fighter/mage, fighter/rogue, fighter/mage/rogue, or mage/rogue.
Gnomes can be fighter, rogues, clerics, or specifically a wizard with the illusionist specialty only. They can multi between any two of these classes, but no more.
Half-elves can be clerics, druids, fighters, rangers, mages, specialist wizards, rogues, or bards. They can multiclass cleric/fighter, druid/fighter, cleric/fighter/mage, druid/fighter/mage, fighter/mage, cleric/ranger, druid/ranger, cleric/mage, druid/mage, fighter/mage, fighter/rogue, fighter/rogue/mage, and mage/rogue.
Halflings can be clerics, fighters, and rogues, or multiclass fighter/rogue.
There are no half-orcs in core AD&D 2nd (I am looking at my Player's Handbook as I type this). They might be in a supplement.
Other notes on races:
You might consider replacing low-light vision and darkvision with infravision, the ability to see heat signatures in darkness.
Elves and half-elves had an ability to sense secret doors without searching.
Halflings had a small chance of having infravision (you rolled to see if you got it).
Gnomes had a limited "Use Magic Device" ability and something akin to stonecunning.
There are other racial differences as well, but we could be here all day marking permutations. Those are the ones that especially stood out to me.
Classes:
There are no barbarians or monks in core (and certainly no alchemists, witches, etc.) Those were from AD&D 1e I believe. There are no sorcerers in core (but again I'd suggest allowing arcane sorcerers if you want).
You might want to implement ability requirements -- you have to be able to roll a minimum ability score in order to take certain classes. And if you're gonna do this oldskool, you're gonna be rolling ability scores, not doing point buy.
Class Ability Requirements:
Fighter: Str 9
Paladin: Str 12, Con 9, Wis 13, Cha 17
Ranger: Str 13, Dex 13, Con 14, Wis 14
Universalist Wizard: Intelligence 9 (note in Pathfinder you need a minimum of Intelligence 11 to cast spells; spell level prerequisites were a little different in AD&D)
Illusionist Wizards: Dexterity 16 (it doesn't list reqs for other specialists)
Cleric: Wisdom 9 (again in PF you need minimum 11 to cast)
Druid: Wis 12, Cha 15
Rogue ("Thieves" if you prefer): Dexterity 9
Bard: Dexterity 12, Int 13, Cha 15
Other interesting notes on classes:
Many classes gained followers at 9th or 10th level. You could simulate this by giving Leadership as a bonus feat.
Clerics are only allowed to use blunt weapons. Interestingly they can use flails and warhammers, which they can't in PF, but they can't use crossbows or daggers, or example. You can also assign allowable weapons by mythos or deity -- but I'd probably simplify this to the cleric remaining proficient in their deity's favored weapon, per PF/3.x.
Druids can only use clubs, sickles, darts, spears, daggers, scimitars, slings, and staves. They are still restricted to non metal armors.
Bards use the wizard spell list, they do not have their own.
For character creation I would again suggest only rolling for stats and rolling for hit points--including at 1st level--as well.
Ah, as I read through this book I simultaneously recall the ways in which it incited my imagination as a child, and the ways in which I remember feeling frustratingly restricted by the ways the rules worked...
For stats, I'd put in a hard limit of 18 for humans, and 20 for demi-humans in their best racial stat...Elves/Dex, Dwarves and half-orcs/Con, Halflings/Dex, Gnomes/Int. This would mean humans get the best overall stats, but the extremes belong to demi-humans. The only way above these limits is magic items and inherent bonuses...NOT spells.
'Tick up' all stat bonuses. 14 +1, 16+2, 18+3, 20 +4. Make it require a major investment to get even a +1 with point buy.
Caps on stats impose a 'grittier' feel on the game, because you don't have huge stats turning you into a demigod, you have what you have.
barring certain races from classes is a flavor thing, akin to having PrC's that other races can't enter, it's no different. If your elves, half-orcs, and gnomes simply can't be LG enough to be paladins, so be it.
And while it's definitely flavor, gender limits were in force. Simply impose a flat -2 to Str for being female, and give them a +2 to their lowest other stat.
==Aelryinth
|
I'm directing this particularly at the seasoned veterans of our community who were around for 1e and 2e. First, I'd like to say that the game has come a long way, and I am envious of you guys who were there to witness the birth of the "game". I'd give my ioun stones just to sit at a table in nostalgialand and play a game of AD&D with GG himself. Digressing, I am, in a few hours, about to get a Pathfinder CRB and Bestiary in the mail and am about to put out here a bit of a fantasy of mine. Currently, I have no access to any AD&D material, but I would like some advice on how to give my game the old school feel. I'd like to have the same race/class limitations as well. I am a 22 year old hoping to run this game for some older gentlemen who played AD&D when it first came out. I know the experience will be a little different, given the different ruleset, but what can I do to make my game as retro as possible? I hope I have clarified my mission and question throughly. If I haven't, please help me to do so.
EDIT: Perhaps. I could take the bard back to its druidic roots and make it a PrC, and do the same for the Ranger and Paladin for starters.
Focus on your audience. How old are these older gentlemen? Have they played much since their AD&D days? Do they play Pathfinder or other RPGs currently?
In my experience, folks leaping from AD&D to Pathfinder/3.5 are in for quite a shock. If you want to make your game as retro as possible, Pathfinder is probably not the best starting point. Castles & Crusades is a nice compromise between old school and new school that you may want to take a look at.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, I Miyagied you. For sure.
Think about that. "You already know how to do it."
Without compromising that mantra to ponder, consider this excerpt from Frog God Games, but don't necessarily try to replicate it - just ponder its central message....
"The Classic Style:
The Black Monastery is presented in the spirit of fun typical of the classic, “old school” gaming style. It is an adventure in the classic style because it follows the design assumptions that were common in many publications and local campaigns during the early days of Dungeons and Dragons. In the classic era, the dungeon master was the final authority and was assumed to have complete control. Every event did not have to have a complete rationalization, formula or rules explanation. Mysterious phenomena, riddles and surprises were the norm. This module assumes that the dungeon master will take control and mold it to his campaign.
In a classic game, monsters might be stronger or weaker without having to figure out why. For unknown reasons, Flinds were the only creatures capable of wielding nunchaku. Qullan would die before revealing the special techniques for sharpening their broadswords. Piercers would wait most of their lives just to drop on adventurers and spend the next month crawling back up the wall after a miss. Skeletons always did 1d6 damage no matter what weapons they wielded. Rust monsters made sense. Orcs and gnolls would live next door to each other in dungeons that were essentially monster hotels and no one worried about why. In one of the classic modules by Judges Guild a single giant rat in a group of two dozen had 26 hit points because a typist made a mistake and that was okay – one of the rats was just really big.
Classic play usually assumed that monsters and player characters would follow standard archetypes. Magic-users always had white beards and pointy hats. Barbarians always wore rags and enormous fur boots. Paladins were noble and saintly. Fighters wore plate mail. Thieves climbed walls…a lot. Clerics were vaguely like Catholic priests gone bad, and they always chanted in Latin. All dwarves acted just like Gimli. All elves acted just like Legolas. Monsters were generally cheerful about their roles, including Norse berserkers who rated their own listing in the AD&D Monster Manual because they wandered around underground quite a bit, looking for player characters to fight.
In The Black Monastery, evil priests have left behind a large number of magical items and effects. They left poems and messages for intruders. They posted guardians that parade around chanting. They spawned ghostly effects that cannot be explained. Pictures are still hanging on walls. Dishes are rattling in the kitchen. Kobolds have decided a dungeon is a good place to roast a pig. Magic globes float in the air, waiting to explode. Statues perform strange, magical acts for no particular reason. Why? Who knows? All of that is okay. Explanations of these magical and monstrous events are provided from time to time, but they don’t really matter. The point is to have fun running about looting the place and trying to survive."
|
|
As someone who has been a DM since 1978, and have played every version, I see no issue with playing something like the Rise of the Runelord Anniversary Edition. Goblins are an early enemy, then Ogres and Giant. That is old school. Standpoint is a rich starting town, not unlike many of the starting towns in the 1st and 2nd edition days. The only thing I would restrict is to keep the classes to the CRB. That alone will give it more of an old school feel.
Back in the day we rolled 6 six-sided die, took the highest four rolls, and repeated the process six times. If someone had really bad luck, we said you rolled a peasant. Try again. There was no point buying system for us very early on.
Pathfinder game play is so much better than any prior system. Things have improved. There is no need to reinvent the wheel to get an old school feel. As I said if you stick to just the CRB, that alone will give you much of what you are looking for.
Good gaming. And let us know how things turn out.
Honestly if you want to have 3.x/PF with a 2e feel you just need to make a couple of tweaks.
1) Make Casting Slower- Extend the casting action of most spells to full round actions. If there is no move and shoot (unless the Wizard is riding a mount which has it's own complications) and the casters are limited to 5' steps then wizarding is much riskier. Gank the squishy mage becomes a much more reasonable task. No Quicken spell at all.
2) Make martial types more mobile- If you don't want full move + full attack then go with a partial move that you can split attacks anywhere in between. Move 10' swing a sword move 5' more and swing another time.
3) Consider eliminating AoOs- they slow combat down
4) Consider revising Iterative attacks- I like the Trailblazer revision (2 attacks at a diminishing penalty).
5) Revise save progressions - 1/2 HD + 2 for favored save is a nice progression. This is nice for removing the ever present cloak of resistance from the game.
6) Boost Evocation- it rocked on toast in 2e, it sucks in 3.x/PF
Some very good ideas here, particularly the save progression. In 1e/2e, the HD of the target was virtually the only factor in determining the number he needed to save. Giving weak saves a boost would be a good idea.
As far as evocation spells go, they weren't that great in 2e either. Sure, monsters didn't get Con bonuses to hit points, but it was 2e that first imposed the damage caps based on spell levels. 1e didn't have any. Consider dumping the caps and letting the dice grow (though that won't really affect the game until after 10th level).
3) Consider eliminating AoOs- they slow combat downSo utterly true. Like many things in 3.X/PF, it was a good concept that ultimately does more to hurt the flow of the game than provide any benefit.
Note while this is true, AoO's are one of the few ways Melee has to increase their damage, AND it puts a tactical slant to movement that wasn't their before, i.e. do I soak the hit or avoid this one? It also has considerably more downs for a melee then casters, who won't miss it and would love to be able to withdraw from stuff without taking a hit, i.e. taking away AoO's is cster love, and definitely not 1E.
Remember that in 1E, all spells were full round actions...you start them on your turn, and they finish on your NEXT turn. If you got hit anytime in between, you lost the spell...AND you couldn't move!!
a nice way of favoring evocations in a 1E environment is to make them a standard action, so they actually go off during your turn and are harder to interrupt...
==Aelryinth
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another thing to take into account was that most classes in AD&D had hit die limits. Fighters and Paladins got 9 hit dice, and then started gaining a flat 3 hp per level (with no con bonus) at level 10+. Clerics could get up to 10 hd, while wizards could get up to 11, I believe, after which they gained 2 and 1 hp per level, respectively. As a result, even higher level characters tended to be *much* squishier than in 3.x.
As for class restrictions, traditionally the core races had the following options:
Dwarf: Cleric, Fighter, Thief, or Fighter/Thief. I think 2e allowed Cleric/Fighters, too
Elf: Cleric, Fighter, Magic-User, Thief, Fighter/Magic-User, Fighter/Thief, Magic-User/Thief, or Fighter/Magic-User/Thief
Gnome: Cleric, Fighter, Illusionist, Thief, Fighter/Illusionist, Fighter/Thief, Illusionist/Thief
Half-elf: Cleric, Fighter, Magic-User, Ranger, Thief, or pretty much any combination thereof, including Cleric/Magic-User or Cleric/Fighter/Magic-User
Halfling: Fighter, Druid, Thief, or Fighter/Thief
Half-Orc: Cleric, Fighter, Thief, Cleric/Fighter, Cleric/Thief, or Fighter/Thief
Some class/race combinations had *very* restrictive level limits, so to capture the same sort of feel you might want to disallow Halfling Fighters, Half-Orc Clerics, and possibly Half-Elf Clerics.
Edit: Bah! I am slow!
Wow...so many responses...
@DeathQuaker
I'm going to add the Half-Orc and come up with race restriction...definately no mage...I'm not trying to emulate 2e AD&D EXACTLY, but it all helps. I like to think of it as 8-bit Pathfinder. Barbs and Monks might stay...I'm still up in the air about that one.
@Aelryinth
All very good points, most of which I will be implimenting. Using a 15 point buy will help me deal with most of the higher stat problems...that and jacking up the price of ALL stat boosting items (which they will only get if I give them out.) I'll probably disallow the magic item creation feats, but allow them to craft their own armors and stuff using the appropriate Craft skill.
@Narl
They're getting into their 50s, but have played 3.x and have made the transition well. They are master GMs, all four of them.
@Pax
You've given me great ideas man, thank you so much.
I really like this thread...
Limits on top stats are more important then anything. You must especially stop all spells that grant Str, con and dex bonuses right in the bud.
Allow Str buffers to be around...it has ALWAYS been the only stat you could easily buff (Strength spell, level 2 spell, +2-8 Str points for fighters) and the only one you could get over 19 (Girdles of Giant Str).
Why? Because it's how fighters do more damage as they level. Other classes get damage just by leveling, from increased caster levels or hit dice. Fighters must get stronger.
And yeah, the girdles didn't work for anyone but fighters, either! :)
==Aelryinth
7) You could move and get all your attacks. There were no iteratives. And unless you were TWF, only Melee types got multiple attacks.
Being able to move and get all of your attacks is a very common misconception with 1e/2e. You really couldn't. If you were more than 1" from your opponent, you could close and gain one attack but not your iterative (which did exist). You had to start within that 1" in order to get multiple attacks. The way that scale worked, however, was quirky and based on old, arcane wargaming roots. Indoors, 1" = 10 feet (only 5 feet more than the 5 foot step). Outdoors, however, it was 10 yards. However, since the scale was preserved the net effect was negligible on a tabletop with miniatures.
Iterative attacks differed from 3e/PF style iteratives. If you got multiple attacks because you were a fighter class (including rangers, barbarians, paladins, cavaliers) you got multiple attacks. These iteratives were at the same modifier but weren't generally taken all at once. You alternated with other characters who had iteratives. Natural multiple attack routines (like a claw/claw/bite) were still taken all at once though.
11) Melees had the equivalent of Best Save Progression (but didn't get the +2 bonus to start with). Clerics had great opening progression for Fort and Will stuff, but Poor progression. Mages had Great vs Spells, and sucked at the rest. Rogues got great for anything involving agility, and sucked at the rest.
Fighters had great saves but only between 8th and 17th levels (pretty wide territory to be sure). But before that, they were actually relatively bad compared to clerics and wizards. And after 17th, when the fighter's saves were at their best, other characters could still get better and match his good saves. One reason the fighter's saves were so good was because his improved every 2 levels while everyone else's were slower. That's also why his tops out at 17th level while other PCs get better until 21st. Thief saves were the worst of the lot. Very few levels were bright spots for the thief and his was the only set that had a save stay above 10 (Breath Weapon).
12) The nature of saving throws meant magic was very powerful at low level, and got progressively less effective as characters levelled and their saves improved., since spells didn't have escalating DC's.
This is a very important point. Magic spells got more powerful in full effect but were less likely to affect a powerful target. The save or die spell was a feast or famine strategy in 1e/2e, emphasis on famine.
Give everyone and everything max hit points and then use the armor as DR rule...
Thatll draw fights out a bit and with every thing hitting every other thing its feels a lot more clashy.
It's a minor point, but for the record, attacks of opportunity were described in the revised 2E Dungeon Master Guide. I don't know if anyone ever used that rule, but they were mentioned. (I don't have the original 2E or 1E manuals, so I don't know about those.)
And really, even in the old days, I never saw anyone play "0 hit points is dead". That death occurred at negative 5 hit points was one of those unwritten yet somehow widely known rules, along with the "4d6 and take the best 3" rule.
|
|
Give everyone and everything max hit points and then use the armor as DR rule...
Thatll draw fights out a bit and with every thing hitting every other thing its feels a lot more clashy.
Why draw fights out? Combat in AD&D tended to be resolved a lot quicker, especially since characters generally had a lot fewer options for what they could do in combat. Armor as DR wouldn't really be in keeping with old-school either... there was no DR in AD&D, as far as I can recall; something was either immune to your attack or took full damage.
Hit points, hit points, hit points.
The biggest change for me (though some of the others have hit the nail on the head with other observations like Attacks of Opportunity, Trait implications, and Class/Level Restrictions--and especially magic item availability) was that hit points meant something. Getting hit MEANT something.
Roll for hit points at every level. If you want to be a sport, allow an optional re-roll at Level One (but you have to keep the new roll, even if you swap a 2 for a 1). Roll again at every level until 10. Then stop. After that, the characters only get their CON bonus in new HP.
If this means you have a high-level monster that can bite a PC once and drop them to half their HP...good. It makes the high-level monster that much more dangerous..and that much more satisfying to defeat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Update: My CRB and Bestiary just got here!!!
|
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
To the OP:
See, the idea here isn't to actually play 2nd Edition nor first. Play Pathfinder RPG, as that is your intention. The old school feel is something even the publishers of old school materials haven't quite figured out. It's not about the rules.
Consider the following:
- You already know how to play.
- Set the rules aside and run the game spontaneously.
- Don't look things up, or bring up rules during the game.
- Let the story flow. Imagine things and make them happen in-the-moment.
- If you want to make a game decision randomly, such as, "Is there a cleric walking down the street," just estimate the % chance there would be one... say 53%, then roll the percentile dice under that amount, and keep the game moving.
- Keep the pace of game moving. Don't wait for players to make all the decisions i.e. have someone walk into the room, an explosion occurs in a building, a carriage chase occurs in the street.
- Keep introducing many things as they enter your mind and you will stay "in the moment". When this happens, the players stay in-the-moment with you, because there's no time for looking things up, only time to roleplay and flow with the story.
- Understand the illusion you create with free will, and never speak of this secret to the players e.g. you control everything, but you always make it seem like they do.
- Keep players distracted by description, story, NPCs, events, happenings all around them. This sparks their imagination, and your quick responses allow you to rivet them into staying in-character, rather than focusing on rules or books.
- The true "feel" can occur at the table regardless of ruleset. You could be playing AD&D or Pathfinder RPG, or GURPS --- it doesn't matter.
Have a basic story outline with you, about the size of a bar napkin:
For example:
I. A swarthy looking pirate is running on foot through the town street and being chased by a demon. The demon encases the pirate in ice or stone, laughs and provides a clue about why he came for him.
II. The PCs investigate the details and learn of an adventure locale of your choosing.
III. The adventure locale is filled with traps or riddles, strange statues, magic mouths that talk, or anything else that crosses your mind as-you-play.
IV. The PCs make their way to some "final chamber" after going through some rooms or areas of your choosing (try to make these up as you go), and battle the evil demon or other arch-villain.
V. The PCs return to town, un-freeze the pirate and he tells them about some other adventure locale with promise of treasure or magic as a reward for helping.
Remember, you already know how to play. Trust your imagination. When you are actively trusting your instincts during the game, the players will use their imaginations too. Listen to your players, and each time they propose an idea, run with that.
And the biggest finesse you can possibly demonstrate during execution is to interact with the PCs via some NPC or creature in order to hold a dialogue in which the PLAYERS suggest exactly what the story is: who the villain may be, or how to solve the situation---then USE THE PLAYER'S improvised ideas about the nature of the adventure itself to make this become the ACTUAL explanation, solution, or story itself.
This becomes highly organic, requires little preparation, and you already know play.
It is smoke and mirrors, and this is the big secret to fantastic GMing in any ruleset.
One final scandalous secret: don't plan/structure/try to control the design of every game element... because... you also don't need any modules/published game materials. In sum, 1) you don't really need the rules (but you must have the appearance that you are following rules and your game must be internally consistent), 2) Improvise more than you plan and stay in-the-moment to keep the players so off-base and guessing that the game becomes both intriguing and swift, and 3) You don't need any publisher's game content or books (except for looking up spell effects which we often did, and a basic understanding of AC vs. attack rolls), otherwise keep the focus on the characters, and keep it moving.
WOW. I didn't think I could articulate that in a few short paragraphs myself. After reading this post, don't try to follow it step-by-step. Let yourself stay present when you play, you need only your imagination to pull off what you are hoping to achive. You can even forget everything I just told you.You already know how to to do it.