AD&D is in the air

[edit: The cover on the page I linked to, when I posted this, looked different than it does now. It was using the Trampier demon idol, changed around a bit. Thanks to Greylond for bringing it too my attention.]

I just browsed issue #183 of Knight of the Dinner Table, since I just came home from the local comic shop. In it was an ad for the upcoming "advanced" Hackmaster PHB. Guess how the cover looks like? I have no idea if it's a mock-up or the real deal, but let me say it sure is there to invoke nostalgia.

So, this makes me think of Hackmaster, WotC and AD&D. There's no secret that WotC wants to have the old gamers back. Whether they will succeed, nobody knows. But, reprinting AD&D sure is a good way to flirt with nostalgia. I do wonder why they did such a moronic thing as to limit the sales, though. If they really wanted all old gamers back, they would have sold as many as they could, right? Well, maybe not if they want anyone to by 5th ed. aybe they think that those guys have gotten their fix, and the rest have to buy 5th ed...

Poor us.

Anyway.

I'm thinking that Hackmaster, since it's also using the same AD&D nostalgia thing, might be a better choice for the rest of us. I have read Hackmaster Basic (but have not made a review, since I really couldn't make a review without lot of whining, and that's boring) and in some respects I can see that game as a successor to AD&D. It's filled with fiddly bits, and could work decently as a generic fantasy system in a way that, SRD and all those OGL games withstanding, 3rd ed never was. There are even parts there that are obnoxious and makes no sense, just like 1st ed.

So, is this a love letter to Kenzer and their Hackmaster line? No, not really. I have never played AD&D and many parts of it I find outright bizarre, and like I said I never managed to write a Hackmaster review that was very positive.

But, AD&D is in the air. Right now you see that Trampier cover every way you turn. I'm thinking that someone are right in line with the current. I wish them luck.

AD&D saves and ability checks

One of my commentators on yesterday's post mentioned something I find interesting, and suggests something about the relationship between abilities and saves that I had also been thinking on.

The first time I was DM for B/X, I instinctively asked for a d20 against a stat when a situation came up which I had no other mechanic for. The game I had been running before that had been D&D 3rd ed. and as far as I know, that mechanic is not specified there. Rolling against a stat seem to be a long standing way to resolve things like that, though.

In 3rd ed. the relationship between saves and stats are quite clear. You get a bonus on all saves from higher than usual stats and they have tidied up the zoo of saves into three general cases. If you compare this to how Call of Cthulhu, or other BRP games, handle it you can see that the Idea and Luck rolls etc. are all mapped to one stat each. In the new big Yellow Tome of BRP, I think they have expanded it to one such roll for each stat. Is this a way worth taking with D&D?

I like the idea of saves, but if you should have more than one, or not just a LUCK score, maybe it could be interesting to tie them to the stats. Inspired by the neat Target20 system, maybe you could roll a d20 trying to beat 20, and getting a bonus from the stat the DM decide or you talk him to accepting, getting a bonus according to whatever bonus scheme you like. Say, +1 per 2 above 13 or just +2 if above 15. You choose.

Looking at the different saves in AD&D I do find it slightly odd to Save versus Petrification when avoiding a rockslide, and I'd argue a bonus for high DEX any time. The system above sounds flexible enough to me.

Then I guess you could just say the DM asks for a Save vs. Rocks and invent some shit on the spot...

AD&D, using just the PHB

I have been thinking about games I want to run for a while now. Since I listen to Roll For Initiative podcast, which is all about AD&D, one candidate have been AD&D. For many, probably for many of my dear readers, it is a familiar game. Not so for me.

Way back when I started playing, one of my school mates talked about the games his older brother played. I had the opportunity to visit them, and got to browse the AD&D PHB, that game for "older guys". What I remember most clearly where the illustrations. I thought they looked like doodles made by ball point on a pad of paper while sitting chatting on the phone. Ugly game, not for me.

Later I started to buy some 2nd ed game books, since there were dozens of game worlds and some was actually pretty cool. I still abhorred the game, now for the rules.

So, since I now own two [sic!] copies of the PHB, I feel like I should give this game a chance. Having played B/X and S&W it feels a lot more familiar than it did way back then.

Everyone who have read the AD&D rules knows how much quirks they hide within those pages, and I intended to limit some of them. My first move was to decide that I'd play with the PHB, only!

All those old hands now shake their heads, since they know that there are no combat tables in the PHB. That I knew, but had forgotten. What I didn't knew, was that there are no saving throws in the PHB! All the rules on how to make a character, but not a word about saves!?

Since these rules are organized in a quite eccentric way, I might have missed the saves. Please tell me where they are in that case! But, how would the game work without saves?

When I had realized that they were missing, I suddenly thought that maybe it would be an interesting experiment to just disallow saves, since they are not in the PHB. Disallowing combat it more problematic, but AD&D without saves sounds like it could work.

What do you think?