Questioning D&D players...

[Mojambo]

Hello fellow nerdlings.

I have been requested to run a few friends of mine, who have never played D&D or roleplayed in any way, through a Dungeons and Dragons campaign.

I played a bunch and DM'd a bit with 1st and 2nd edition. Played a bit more with 3rd edition, and have only read about 4th edition. What I've read about it has convinced me that I don't want to go near it with a ten foot pole. It appears to be a tactical miniatures game and I'm just not into it at all. I've always preferred my D&D story heavy and the combats more theatrical (and exclusively in the mind) than tactical (moving pieces on a board) in nature.

Anyway, I'm trying to decide what edition to run this campaign under. I can think of pluses and minuses for every edition based on the type of DM I am and (particularly) the type of players I'll have playing.

The players - I believe these players will most enjoy creating characters with stories behind them and then having their characters story and history melded into the bigger picture of the campaign world. Story will be the draw for them. This is a plus for me, as that is what I like to do as a DM. I think they won't be very inclined to min/max or munchkin game. They are looking to taste the flavor of fantasy roleplaying, not necessarily digging through the nuts and bolts. Granted, this a guess. They'll probably end up power gaming maniacs...

The DM - I like to create worlds and then find ways to make the PC's important within them using the (hopefully deep) backstories and histories they come up with in their character concept. This is of course accomplished in very small ways at the beginning and then as they level they begin to take the reigns of power and responsibility on the world scale. I am not particularly good at crafting individual adventure scenarios and like to adapt existing published adventures to fill out my overarching campaign. I'm also not a real big fan of rules adjudication. I'd rather make quick commonsense rulings than stick to the rules.

Ugh. The post is becoming so much longer than it should be... Anyway. The reason I laid out all this info on my skills and the players' gaming appetite is that I need advice on what edition I should go with.

1st edition. Pros - There would be something really nice about giving them as close to the Gygax experience as possible. Plus, I just have so many great memories about playing 1st edition. Cons - Not the most friendly game in terms of number crunching. Kind of hard to make magic users viable, especially for newbies. There's a lack of supplementary materials, although I could probably download a bunch of those awesome early adventures.

2nd edition. Pros - Right in the wheelhouse of my gaming experience. Tons of supplementary materials. Cons - Kind of a bland edition at heart. Lacks the charm of 1st edition, and the d20 improvements of 3rd.

3rd edition. Pros - d20 makes it simpler from a math standpoint. Lots of character depth and customization. Cons - Trending more towards tactical based combat, although nothing compared to 4th ed. Much of the character customization (feats etc) is based around combat min/maxing. Tieflings... blech.

So what say you? Knowing what you know about DM and players what edition should we go with?

[YOY]

1. I'd avoid 4th ed too.

Sucks shit through a straw...just what idiot concieved of it needs to be castrated.

Have you seen the 4th ed Monster Manual? No descriptions...just stats.

[Geek_Girl]

2. I'm running a 3rd edition game every Monday night

A few months ago my gaming group decided they wanted to give 1st edition a try just for Nostalgia sake. I have to tell I didn't enjoy as much as I thought I would. I played 1st edition in the late 80's and loved it. But I really think 3rd edition is a better system all around. Maybe convert some 1st edition modules to give it that Gary Gygax feel. One of my favorites is Sinister Secret Of Salt Marsh.

My vote is for 3rd edition and then 1st edition. I would skip 2nd edition. And avoid 4th edition which in my opinion has absolutely no resemblance to D&D. They should just call it the Pen & Paper MMO Game.

[Broken_Hero]

3. I really can't give you any decent advice

I never played first edition, or third edition(well, I played a couple of times, but basically I have zero knowledge of 3rd)...but I know second edition, like the back of my hand.

I do like making common sense rules, on the fly while being the DM. One of the first things my friends and I discussed while playing 2nd was leveling up with your weapon. It makes sense, the more you practice, and use your sword/weapon of choice that your weapon speed should increase(I would use every five levels of character leveling weapon speed would increase, some of my friends would use every 3 character level ups).

With the inclusion of the...damn, it was like a monsters/character book, where you could create characters that were not the usual, paladin, wizard, ranger schtick...you could be an Orc, Firbolg(sp I know), Minotaur, etc etc....

I all ready had half races in the games I'd run, a buddy of mine was a HUGE fan of half orc/half human characters. We would create our own character classes as well, and discuss amongst ourselves what the basic traits would be, and how to level up and what not. But, thats beside the point...DMing on the fly is rather fun.

I did follow a lot of the rules of 2nd edition, but some of the more...absurd ones I didn't even incorporate. I had another bud, who was such a stickler for rules, that he would keep track of our...what is it, the max weight our character could carry(I can't recall the proper word for it), and would even dock us on constitution if we didn't "proclaim" that our character took a whiz, and holding in our bodily fluids would cause us harm...I think he tried making it TOO realistic, and it made gaming incredibly hard when he was the DM.

But, for your main question, I have no advice...I only know second edition, and its been a while since I played that, about 8 years or so...

[TransitJohn]

5. Encumberance. n/t

:hi:

[TransitJohn]

4. Are you set on AD&D?

Because D&D would be awesome for some newbies. Think about how cool it'd be to take 'em through The Keep on the Borderlands!

[Ian David]

7. My favorite is still Ravenloft.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravenloft

[YOY]

8. A-mothafuckin-men.

Great story, great dungeon, great baddie, something in it for everyone.

Count Strahd Von Zarovich...the first vampyre...

[Ian David]

6. You ask the women what THEY want to do, for several reasons

1) That's how life works. Get used to it.
2) In D&D, the more women you have playing, the better. Same goes for things like "key parties."

Trust me on both counts.

[Orsino]

9. 2nd Edition, possibly with either kits or Skills & Powers.

I hope to be getting some gaming going myself pretty soon, and I'd go full-on S&P for the ability to fine-tune characters and blur class distinctions. If you can get your hands on the Core Rules CD-ROM and its expansion, do so. It's a nice GUI that helps one build characters (as well as containing all the needed books, and GM tools like mappers).

For absolute n00bs, though, I'd recommend plain-vanilla second edition for simple character generation. The kits can be tacked on later as players gain interest and want to specialize, as sort of "prestige classes." In theory, a character that takes on a kit doesn't grow more powerful, as the new disadvantages offset the advantages--you would ensure balance by tweaking these features as necessary.

edit: one other tack I would take with n00bs is to ensure that no one is barred from playing a particular class/race due to sucky dice rolls. Whatever catches their fancy, they should be encouraged to run with it. If you can, allow them to design as much of the campaign world as they like. Let 'em name their hometowns and as many NPCs as they can dream up. A little emotional investment pays off big, I think.

[Orsino]

10. Be sure to revisit this thread.

Let's hear what system you decide on, and why.

[wickerwoman]

11. I've played 1st through 3.5

I really like d20 but hate a lot of pedantic stuff (like encumbrance, attacks of opportunity, etc.) which Blizzard forced them to add to make it more "realistic". (Killing a dragon, finding a treasure hoard and then learning you can only carry about thirty pounds of it home? Not what D&D is about.)

So we used a lot of house rules with 3rd edition the last time I played (mostly throwing out and ignoring stuff that slows the game down). At the point where you need to roll dice every 15 seconds to see how the wind is effecting your stamina with modification for the slope height and how long it's been since your last meal, you might as well be playing on a frackin' computer.

I think the rules are a lot less important than the people anyway. All my good D&D memories are of staying up all night, eating crap, and drawing maps with my friends.

[ZombieHorde]

12. The second edition of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay is pretty cool.

3rd or 3.5 edition D&D is probably the easiest rule set, except for the attacks of opportunities which are strange at first.

"I'll cast Sleep."

"It will get an attack of opportunity against you unless you choose to combat cast it."

"Oh. I'll take a 5 foot step back and cast Sleep."

"Big difference. OK, roll to see how many creature you affect."