You could keep characters at 1st-level HP (with constitution, 1-8 for fighting men and 1-7 for clerics and MUs in the original set). Leaving out the Supplement I inflation still leaves some things that are overkill, but not so much. Remember that most attacks do 1d6, so one hit can't kill a figure with 7 or 8 points -- and with a large party, you should be able to swap out casualties with reserves.

You don't get many old, bold fighters (and they don't get level bonuses in OD&D except at the 3-level thresholds).

On +/- 1: Basically, then, the magnitude of difference doesn't matter, only whether you're at an advantage or disadvantage.

You could let bonuses accumulate for advantages of different kinds, thus adding a bit of value for tactical thinking.

Quote from: Phillip;651955On +/- 1: Basically, then, the magnitude of difference doesn't matter, only whether you're at an advantage or disadvantage.

You could let bonuses accumulate for advantages of different kinds, thus adding a bit of value for tactical thinking.

Oh, god, no.

Quote from: talysman;651957Oh, god, no.

To what? To the basic advantage/no advantage approach, or to the elaboration?

Quote from: Phillip;651955You could let bonuses accumulate for advantages of different kinds, thus adding a bit of value for tactical thinking.

Quote from: talysman;651957Oh, god, no.

Quote from: Phillip;651996To what? To the basic advantage/no advantage approach, or to the elaboration?

To the idea of "tactical thinking" that amounts to thinking about bonuses. Funneling monsters one at a time through a doorway so you can pick 'em off, or getting up on a ledge they can't reach and peppering them with arrows, stuff like that? That's tactical thinking that focuses on the fantasy world. Bonus-mongering? That's not tactical thinking, that's focusing on the system.

Focusing on the system is bad, mmmkay?