I like the misc. magic weapons table! It was a crucial addition IMO, errata really.

And it was a product we wanted!

Nope. I enjoyed some of the magic items but the rest I rejected out of hand.

As a kid reading it I remember it making me feel "this is some weird shit that isn't really D&D." Don't remember why exactly, I think I thought that the ability generation stuff was wonky and that the classes had way too many special abilities to keep track of.

Now I'd use it mostly to raid it for things like spells but not much else.

There's really only two ways to handle PC races and classes.

1. Balanced - make them all mathematically equal and open to all, which usually means flavorful as dirt.

2. Unbalanced - some might be overpowered or not, but the overpowered races and classes should be limited either by DM Fiat or random aspects of chargen.

3d6 in order or arrange, you ain't getting a Cavalier or Barbarian, period.  The chance of you getting a Paladin ain't too good either.

4d6 drop lowest, arrange, you have a better chance, but the "overpowered" classes are going to be rare.

In MERP, Beornings and Noldor were a bit out of control too, which is why you set up a race roll chart - problem solved.

Keeping rare shit rare shouldn't really be tough for anyone to do.

Quote from: CRKrueger;618519There's really only two ways to handle PC races and classes.

1. Balanced - make them all mathematically equal and open to all, which usually means flavorful as dirt.

2. Unbalanced - some might be overpowered or not, but the overpowered races and classes should be limited either by DM Fiat or random aspects of chargen.

3d6 in order or arrange, you ain't getting a Cavalier or Barbarian, period.  The chance of you getting a Paladin ain't too good either.

4d6 drop lowest, arrange, you have a better chance, but the "overpowered" classes are going to be rare.

In MERP, Beornings and Noldor were a bit out of control too, which is why you set up a race roll chart - problem solved.

Keeping rare shit rare shouldn't really be tough for anyone to do.

Works I gues sbut the problme with rare stats give the toughest classes and lucky rolls get you the best stuff is the feedback loop which makes it even less balanced.

So great stats means you get to play a character with really tough abilities now you have great stats and tough abilities so you are much better than the guy with crap stats who can only play a weak class.

Also the full 4d6 method as publihsed 1e stats a character with less than 2 15s is a useless chanracter and can be re-rolled. If you follow that logic then a lot of classes that seem rare really aren't
A paladin is self limiting because 17 CHR means you don't have 17 Con or Dex so there is some genuine limit there but a ranger or a druid or a cavalier is not so hard to roll.

And I loved UA but we always stuck to 4d6 drop lowest and arrange
Now I look back on it and I think my god how unbalanced!!!!
The need for more classes with more powers is a shame and as I said 2e should have stripped right back to 4 classes.

Quote from: T. Foster;618438Except that they're absurdly underpowered...Drastically rework their skill-chart...and you're looking at a more reasonable class.

Could be.  I've never actually had anyone run a Thief-Acrobat, I've never played one, so I've never paid much attention to the class details (e.g., skill %s at given levels).  

Have you ever taken a stab at such a rework?

Quote from: T. Foster;618463Good point. Quasi-magical abilities at high level would both be too much of a conceptual break with the non-magical thief class and blur the distinction between this class and the monk (not that there's a whole lot of distinction to start with - I doubt many folks would've batted an eye had all of the acrobat abilities just been given to the monk class as extras - perhaps give tightrope walking and jumping to thieves and monks, tumbling and pole-vaulting just to monks).

Or drop the monk and use a re-worked Thief-Acrobat class, instead of a monk class?

Quote from: jibbajibba;618533Also the full 4d6 method as publihsed 1e stats a character with less than 2 15s is a useless chanracter and can be re-rolled.

Reroll if you don't get 2 15s, really?  We never used that one.  4d6 arrange and that's it, or 4d6 in order and that's it depending on who was DMing.

We had like 1 Cavalier Class Paladin in 20 years of gaming.  A few Cavaliers and a few Barbarians.  Most people didn't take them though because the rules and limitations of the class were enforced along with the awesome.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;618536Could be.  I've never actually had anyone run a Thief-Acrobat, I've never played one, so I've never paid much attention to the class details (e.g., skill %s at given levels).  

Have you ever taken a stab at such a rework?

A couple times, but I always ended up deciding the juice wasn't worth the squeeze (i.e. that even at best I'd still only end up with a barely viable class that no one was going to want to play). Plus in order to get there I'd be violating my self-imposed rule to not do a lot of house-rule screwing around with AD&D - that an important part of the appeal of the game (at least to me) is that it exists "by the book" (or nearly so, within a reasonably fuzzy definition of what that actually means) and that replacing significant chunks of it (like an entire class) with my own house-rules would undermine that. The worst case scenario of the status quo is that the acrobat is a worthless, underpowered class that no one ever chooses to play. That's pretty harmless and easy to deal with, and I'm happier continuing to do that than to re-open Pandora's House-ruling Box.

Quote from: CRKrueger;618546Reroll if you don't get 2 15s, really?  We never used that one.  4d6 arrange and that's it, or 4d6 in order and that's it depending on who was DMing.

We had like 1 Cavalier Class Paladin in 20 years of gaming.  A few Cavaliers and a few Barbarians.  Most people didn't take them though because the rules and limitations of the class were enforced along with the awesome.

Its in the PHB and DMG I think. We seldom enforced but the 'hopeless character rule' is definitely cannon.

We ran cavaliers, barabrians and thief acrobats. In fact my longest running PC is a thief acrobat (still running today although I haven't used him in a game for 3 years) although I retconned him into 2e so he became a Thief with an acrobat kit.
His long running ally is a barbarian and they adventured from about 6th level when they met in Ravenloft until the thief was 13th and the barbarian I think 11th.
We always enforce all class restrictions and one of the funniest of all was when another barbarian (played by the same player but a horse rider more than a viking) was challanged by a cavalier to a duel. A whole load of real life politics resulted from the refusal of the cavalier to fight on foot with no armour just using knives, the barbarians preferred choice of 'duel'.
but I digress.....

Barbarians and Cavaliers both way too tough especially when the class limits are either covered off by special powers, barbarians can both attack creatures hit by only magical weapons and can waive some of their anti-magic phobia as they level, or as things you would do if you roleplayed a character of that type even without preternatural powers, like Cavaliers attacking the most power foe on the field, showing mercy and follwoing a code of chivalry.

Quote from: CRKrueger;618546Reroll if you don't get 2 15s, really?

Like so many other things in the Advanced rules books, it's more an advice than a hard rule. That said, using this advice and rejecting characters who don't have two 15s doesn't mean you end up with a Paladin that easily. The discrepancy of probabilities between a 15 and a 17 matters, for one thing, and putting your 17 in Charisma when you do get it means you probably won't have an 17 Strength or 17 Wisdom, because characters with multiple 17 and 18 scores are even rarer, if legit, using 4d6 drop lowest. Statistically, a lot of people will choose to play something else, rather than the Paladin with a 17 Charisma, a code of honor he must follow, yaddi yadda, instead of say, a plain 17 Strength fighter or 17 Intelligence MU with no strings attached. As it should be, I might add.

So this idea that "hey you can discard a character that doesn't have two 15 so it's uber easy/usual to get a Paladin!" is bogus.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;618511This is my understanding, and it's based on what Gary told me:

[snip]

Thank you, that was informative and insightful.

Quote from: Benoist;618641So this idea that "hey you can discard a character that doesn't have two 15 so it's uber easy/usual to get a Paladin!" is bogus.

Indeed.  Here is the relevant quote from the 1e AD&D PHB (p. 9):

QuoteCHARACTER ABILITIES

Each and every character has six principal characteristics, the character's abilities. These abilities are strength, intelligence, wisdom, dexterity, constitution, and charisma. (See also APPENDIX I , Psionic Ability.) The range of these abilities is between 3 and 18. The premise of the game is that each player character is above average - at least in some respects - and has superior potential. Furthermore, it is usually essential to the character's survival to be exceptional (with a rating of 15 or above) in no fewer than two ability characteristics. Each ability score is determined by random number generation. The referee has several methods of how this random number generation should be accomplished suggested to him or her in the DUNGEON MASTERS GUIDE. The Dungeon Master will inform you as to which method you may use to determine your character's abilities.

I highlighted the sentence in red that is pertinent.

Quote from: Drohem;618650Thank you, that was informative and insightful.

de nada.

Quote from: Lynn;618294Do you consider UA as a required part to 1st Edition?

I do not. To me, 1e AD&D is the MM, PHB, and DMG, as interpreted by me....meaning I don't hold every letter in the books as sacrosanct. I don't use all of the monsters in the MM,  house-rule out bunches of the PHB (Psionics, druids, monks, bards, weapon vs. ac, and others), and use the DMG as a guide to help adjudicate the game, not as a letter-of-the-law instruction manual.

QuoteOr is UA simply some afterthought of options that unbalanced 1st Edition?

I personally think that some of the stuff in UA would be unbalancing if adopted in my game (not passing judgement on any others here....if it all works for you as a whole, by all means enjoy it in your game), you can probably guess from up above that I cherry pick UA for stuff I feel suitable for my game, which at various points in the past has included:
-unarmed combat rules
-ranger tracking
-weapon specialization (though toned down a bit...I don't allow PCs to specialize at first level)
-some spells
-some magic items
-some of the new weapons and armor