Despite what flaws 5E may or may not have at least its not OD&D.
Early Christmas present.
Now I understand why Monte Cook who is running an OD&D game claimed it was more or less unplayable. This game is an unmitigated mess lol although I love it anyway as being the 1st RPG ever I can't really blame it. It more or less only goes up to level 10 and 40 years on it still seem like they have not figured out how to make D&D work at the higher levels.
I like my BECMI and 1E but they are refined by comparison. OD&D rules make very little sense in several cases.
It's strange... while I regard OD&D as being a game with very little choices on the rules going the way that I'd choose to go, I'd never considered it unplayable as written. Perhaps I simply excell at reading rule-sets which are horridly organized and still sorting out what they are telling me the rules are.
Zardnaar wrote:
I have the OD&D box exclusive release and its pretty niice. Didn't play with it as we're big into D&D 5E, but its a wondeful D&D collector's item anyway!
If you are comparing how it was written, then OD&D and 5e are apples and oranges. Back in the day, basically nobody bought the OD&D books who wasn't (a) already a wargamer and/or (b) introduced to the game by someone who already was playing/knew how to play. The books are not written to introduce someone altogether new to the concept, but to provide guidelines for those already playing. Quite quickly, however, Gygax and co. saw that people who were not wargamers and without a connection to others already familiar with the conceits/terminology of wargaming were picking up the game and running into trouble figuring it out, which is why Holmes was commissioned to produce the first Basic Set back in 1977 (which, in the course of production, was also refitted to prepare people for the upcoming release from 1977-1979 of the AD&D books). Still, for those of us who were "apprenticed" by others who were already playing and by reading The Dragon, it's not so hard to make sense of.
It's not a game "without choices" so much as it places the ideas of choice and characterization within game play, rather than in character creation. In fact, there's no character creation at all, only character generation. This is not a flaw so much as a design choice, to put the emphasis on actual play over pre-play and theory-crafting.
That said, I love 5e. People back in the day were creating all sorts of new classes, new spells, etc., and experience has shown us that, while this cannot be reduced to a formula, it needn't be done as back in the day (which boiled down to looking at some numbers, and if they looked good enough, going with it). The trade-off is having a higher page count, but the benefit of allowing someone altogether new to the game to enter in and enjoy playing is a real and crucial advantage.
Llenlleawg wrote:
Llenlleawg wrote:
If you want to see a cool idea that turned into unplayable rules (I tried and love the game anyway), look at the 1980-era Gamma World rules. 
Hebitsuikaza wrote:
Hebitsuikaza, I can only conclude that you never actually played OD&D, or if you have, what you were doing was trying to play 3e or 4e using only the original books. What you say about the lack of options or strategy shows a deep and fundamental lack of understanding about actually playing the game. What the character does is not limited by what's on the character sheet. It's not about character options abd powers, it's about what the player chooses to do with his character.
Besides, you seem to know little to nothing about the character classes. What is the fabled MU spell that kills the party as well as his foes (unless you cast fireball in a 10x10 room, and then you're just an idiot in any edition!)? Why are thieves especially unable to fight, on your view? They're supposed to skulk and try to backstab anyway! There were no limits on fighters' weapons, and despite what you have heard, they were called fighters in the original rules as well as "fighting men", not rather than. Clerics worked just fine without a 1st level spell. The point is, they could all go adventuing, and were supposed to avoid combat at low levels. The point was exploration and finding treasure, not mowing down enemies.
As Maine has noted above, player expectations have changed, and the new rules provide for a broader play experience, especially for helping people to enter the game. However, there's a lot to be said about minimizing the attempt to "craft" a character and make up his "story arc" and just, you know, play the game!