Tuesday, June 14, 2011

When Old School Is Not Enough

I've been having problems lately with the 1st edition AD&D spell selections. In theory the spells work fine, but in practice they are hard to justify as written and tend to slow the game down with details that really should not be a concern. I've been having such a hard time with the wording on some of the spells that I'm seriously considering using the spell descriptions from a later version of the game to replace the Player's Handbook versions! But the question that remains is "which version has the proper spell descriptions?"

Each version of the game seemed to either limit the power of a spell or make it so easy to use that the players started using the spell for uses it was never meant to accomplish. Different versions of the game focus on different aspects of the spells as well. However I find that 2nd edition AD&D was very close in spell notation to 1st edition and could be used wholecloth as a replacement. Many of the spells that were poorly worded in 1st edition were better explained in 2nd edition. However, the level of the spells are somewhat altered as are the descriptions. Some are altered to fit the 2nd edition combat paradigm.

Third edition D&D is a completely different animal. Some of the spell descriptions make no sense when applied to a 1st edition game. 3rd edition adds in level 0 spells (cantrips/orisons) which do not exist in 1st edition and some 1st level spells were demoted to 0-level in this edition. Other spells provide power to the players that I wish to be withheld (i.e. the spell Detect Secret Doors....lazy bastards need to find them for themselves).

I know there were even more drastic changes in 4th edition - changing cast times to reflect that style of combat. Some spells were also made into daily powers, a drastic step away from original D&D. This version of the magic system is not even D&D anymore so I don't think it applies.

This leaves me back at the 2nd edition version of the spells. As written they are the closest in feeling and context to the 1st edition style of gaming. I will have to run this by the players and put it to a vote, but I think they would rather have a more cohesive assemblage of spells to use than what we have in the Player's Handbook and Unearthed Arcana. I'm sure I could incorporate any of the spells that are missing from the 2nd edition lists that the players really want to retain. However I'm certain that using the newer versions of chant, produce fire, color spray, and identify will bring happiness to the party as a whole.

No comments:

Post a Comment

D&D Premises: Heroes vs. Villagers

 I find that most D&D players are firmly entrenched in two different camps when it comes to adventurers: you either believe that adventu...