I don't know how many of us in the OSR/RPG blogosphere have seen it, but there is an ongoing(?) examination of the D&D game rules going on at Building a Better D&D. I stumbled across this site months ago but lost track of it until recently. I am sure many of you will find something of use in many of the 54 entries. Thoughts?
I am actually a bit confused by the blog. I suppose I am trying to understand the audience or purpose of it. It doesn't really build a Better D&D, however you want to define it. There are a series of articles that often identify a problem the author has. Sometimes he proposes an idea to solve the problem. This often involves complicating the mechanics(usually by taking an idea from 3E). However, he never puts forward the mechanics. Based on his issues with AD&D, I really think 4e D&D might be for him. For example, he complains about magic-user (he says wizard which makes me wonder if he really is a 1E player) survivability at lower levels. Well, wizards are supposed die easily at lower levels. It is part of the game design. To make a class that potentially can have nearly god-like powers easy to survive and level is a bit problematic and is really the antithesis of the spirit of how AD&D was written the be played. It really is about surviving at those lower levels.
ReplyDeleteWith that said, there are occasional gems in terms of game design that are suggested by not fully realized. For example, he points out that unless there are modifiers, then there is really no difference between an 8 in Dexterity and a 14. He then goes and redoes the charts. However, the charts reduce a 7 point spread to a 5 point spread. If he idea about game mechanics is correct, then it needs to be much tighter. I am not sure this is something AD&D can fix, but it is certainly something to keep in mind while designing new games.
Overall, there are a lot of inconsistencies in his thoughts and I really think he would be happier playing a modern D&D where he pairs down a few rules rather than adding additional complication to AD&D. As for the reader, I suppose if the DM shares some of his concerns, he might be inspired by one of the articles to take the authors idea and then put mechanics to them for his home game.
I can't argue with your assessment. I am always intrigued when someone starts going through the D&D rules to determine what they would change. I am most interested in the end result of new house-ruled & customized rule manuals for his gaming group.
DeleteThen I don't think this is the site for you. Since he doesn't really develop any mechanics, but says things like treat this class like a 3E prestige class, etc. it isn't really useful. If he would have stuck with adding actual mechanics like it started with, then I think it would be more useful.
DeleteMy thoughts;
ReplyDeleteThe Tao of D&D blog cuts more to the bone of what a better
D&D discussion is about. Here is a link to the author's latest post; http://tao-dnd.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-first-day-of-november-and-news.html
What's listed at the other site is just a list of house rules to me.
I will check that link out. I am always fascinated seeing what some people change and others choose not to change. I can definitely see the house rules vibe you mention.
Delete