Quote from: TristramEvans;850431So, going through it step by step...

Lets say a PC party and a group of snorks meet, parlay quickly breaks down, and a fight begins...

1. Determine if anyone is surprised.
Nope, optional rule that doesnt apply. So we skip pages 1 and 2.

You didn't even manage to get through a single step before revealing that you weren't using the AD&D 1E rules.

(Surprise in AD&D 1E is not only a matter of being surprised by the appearance of a monster. It's also explicitly supposed to be checked to see whether or not someone was unprepared for an attack from a known source. See pg. 62 of the DMG.)

QuoteOr, thats your giant strawman up in flames, I should say.

The irony, of course, is that all you managed to do was offer yet another example of exactly what I said.

The best part were all the other people who conveniently hoist themselves by their own petard by nodding their heads in agreement with you, thus proving that they, too, weren't playing AD&D by the RAW. Just like I said.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;851058You didn't even manage to get through a single step before revealing that you weren't using the AD&D 1E rules.

(Surprise in AD&D 1E is not only a matter of being surprised by the appearance of a monster. It's also explicitly supposed to be checked to see whether or not someone was unprepared for an attack from a known source. See pg. 62 of the DMG.)



The irony, of course, is that all you managed to do was offer yet another example of exactly what I said.

The best part were all the other people who conveniently hoist themselves by their own petard by nodding their heads in agreement with you, thus proving that they, too, weren't playing AD&D by the RAW. Just like I said.

Dude, point to where the AD&D Doll touched you.

What Jason claimed:

Quote from: Justin Alexander;850288Here's the 20 page summary of how initiative works in AD&D 1st Edition.

Wow it takes 20 pages just to summarize the initiative system in AD&D. Golly that sounds like it must be so hideously complicated that no one could ever use it. Let's see what the author, DMPrata, has to say about his summary:

QuoteNever quite understood the full intricacies of the 1E combat system? Advanced Dungeon & Dragons Initiative and Combat Table (ADDICT) summarises all you need to know to run your combats as they should be. Also includes a french translation.

Huh, so that isn't just a summary of the initiative system, "all you need to know to run your combats" describes a summary of all you need to know about the entire AD&D combat system. Why 20 pages to do that in two languages (English and French) doesn't seem too outrageous. Someone sure seems confused here or else disingenuous. :confused: But who? :idunno:

Quote from: Justin Alexander;851058You didn't even manage to get through a single step before revealing that you weren't using the AD&D 1E rules.

(Surprise in AD&D 1E is not only a matter of being surprised by the appearance of a monster.)

Which didnt apply to the combat in question.

You're trying very hard, but you're strawman remains a strawman.

Quote from: Phillip;850740HUH??? Roll for attack has the effect of determining whether any roll for damage is applicable in the first place (and, in combination with a parry roll, and/or perhaps a fumble or critical or impale result, applicable to what).

Yep,between 5 and 10 sets of shaking 1D100, followed by between 5 and 10 sets of shaking for the damage ...

Quote from: Justin Alexander;851058thus proving that they, too, weren't playing AD&D by the RAW. Just like I said.

I don't think I've ever actually played AD&D in a group that was BtB, RAW. Your statement was this (at least I think this is what you're referring to):

QuoteBasically nobody actually plays AD&D.

Many people believe they are. Virtually all of them are deceiving themselves.

That's an absurd statement to make. Of COURSE we're playing AD&D. We're definitely NOT using every single sub-system the game offers because half of them are optional and the other half are specific to certain cases.

If your claim is that to actually play AD&D you have to use every single rule in the book, every single time, I'll make a similar claim that no one has ever played any RPG. No one ever plays Monopoly because I've never seen anyone actually apply the mortgage rules. No one plays SFB because sometimes you capitulate before the guy can roll on the DAC after he hit you with four overloaded photons.

There's much more to playing a game, any game, than 100% adherence to what's in the books.

Quote from: Brad;851096There's much more to playing a game, any game, than 100% adherence to what's in the books.

If millions of screaming retards actually realized this, then there would be much less message board traffic.

The hilarious thing about this 30+ page thread is it seems nobody actually read the OP. The people the OP cited didn't say they were embarrassed to play AD&D anymore (that was editorializing on the part of the OP). They just said the couldn't play it. They had moved on to different games. Is that really so offensive? I can't play Risk. I have other boardgames I'll always want to play instead. Doesn't mean I'm embarrassed by Risk, or that Risk has anything to apologize for.

This is why grognards have a reputation for having remarkably thin skin.

Quote from: Brad;851096That's an absurd statement to make. Of COURSE we're playing AD&D. We're definitely NOT using every single sub-system the game offers because half of them are optional and the other half are specific to certain cases.

If your claim is that to actually play AD&D you have to use every single rule in the book, every single time, I'll make a similar claim that no one has ever played any RPG.

  Justin's argument, as I understand it, is that while most RPGs give you implicit or explicit permission to alter or ignore rules, AD&D 1st Edition strongly exhorts, if not outright commands, that the rules be used as a complete, coherent and unmodified whole.

  I'm not familiar enough with the textual details of AD&D to know whether this is accurate. However, what rules beyond the bard and psionic appendices are called out as optional?

  (And this argument really should be qualified as applying to 1st Edition. 2nd Edition has a radically different ethos.)

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;851160(And this argument really should be qualified as applying to 1st Edition. 2nd Edition has a radically different ethos.)

In what way? (I'm entirely unfamiliar with 2E.)

Quote from: Bren;851163In what way? (I'm entirely unfamiliar with 2E.)

"By now, you should be familiar with the rules in the Player's Handbook. You've probably noticed things you like or things you would have done differently. If you have, congratulations. You've got the spirit every Dungeon Master needs. Curiosity and the desire to make changes, to do things differently because your idea is better than the other guy's--these are the most important things a Dungeon Master needs. As you go through this rule book, I encourage you to continue to make these choices.

"Choice is what the AD&D 2nd Edition game is all about. We've tried to offer you what we think are the best choices for your AD&D campaign, but each of us has diferent likes and dislikes. The game that I enjoy may be quite different from your own campaign. But it is not for me to say what is right or wrong for your game. True, I and everyone working on the 2nd Edition have had to make fundamental decisions, but we've tried to avoid being dogmatic and inflexible. The AD&D game is yours, it's mine, it's every player's game.

"So is there an "official" AD&D game? Yes, but only when there needs to be. ...

"Take the time to have fun with the AD&D rules. Add, create, expand, and extrapolate. Don't just let the game sit there, and don't become a rules lawyer woorrying about each piddly little detail. If you can't figure out the answer, MAKE IT UP!" -- Zeb Cook, Foreword to the AD&D 2nd Edition Dungeon Master's Guide, 2/9/1989

  Note that when I say 'radically different ethos', it would be more accurate to say 'from that assumed by Justin's argument'. I'm not intimately familiar with the text of 1st Edition, although what I have read suggests that one could find sentiments both paralleling and opposing these both in the core books and in Gygax's external comments.

Quote from: Bren;851163In what way? (I'm entirely unfamiliar with 2E.)

Probably half of the content in the 2E PHB and DMG are labled as optional rules, and all of the non-core books are.

2E wanted to be all things to all people, to the maximum extent that the AD&D framework could be stretched and still be recognizable.

Thanks for the explanations on 2E. That sounds more like the tone in the original rules.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;851160Justin's argument, as I understand it, is that while most RPGs give you implicit or explicit permission to alter or ignore rules, AD&D 1st Edition strongly exhorts, if not outright commands, that the rules be used as a complete, coherent and unmodified whole.

  I'm not familiar enough with the textual details of AD&D to know whether this is accurate. However, what rules beyond the bard and psionic appendices are called out as optional?

  (And this argument really should be qualified as applying to 1st Edition. 2nd Edition has a radically different ethos.)

Huge chunks are clearly labeled as optional in 1st ed.  My DMG is right over there but frankly I'm too fucking lazy to look.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;851188Huge chunks are clearly labeled as optional in 1st ed.  My DMG is right over there but frankly I'm too fucking lazy to look.

It's like saying Oxygen is a metal.  It is so ridiculously, obviously false that actually lowering yourself to proving it wrong is beneath pond scum.  You have better things to do, like die in 30 years.