-
DIAMONDS & RUST
-

-	-	-	-	-
Dragon #39	-	1st Edition AD&D	-	Dragon magazine

In the preface to the Players’ Handbook Gary Gygax points out that
he has set himself up as final arbiter of FRP in the minds
of the majority of D&D adventurers by authoring the Advanced D&D
project.

Since the publication of the Dungeon Masters Guide my old Chainmail
and vintage Dungeons & Dungeons has been relegated to a dingy
carboard box in the storage shed. Someday, years from now, I will
show them with the same pride that comes from bringing out my 1962
version of Tactics II, my first war game

Several months ago I came across a member of the minority that
hasn’t acknowledged Gary as final arbiter. The campaign he ran was
based on the original spirit of Chainmail instead of the latest revisions.
To say the least, the game was fresh and unorthodox. His foundation
was the 3rd edition of Chainmail and his vague recollections of the
3-volume set of Dungeons & Dungeons, which he never purchased.

Most players of D&D lie somewhere between the extremes of
Gygax-as-the-last-word and Chainmail-is-good-enough-for-me. But
the contrast between these 2 poles raises some interesting questions.
How much uniformity is required from campaign to campaign? When
does uniformity become restrictive conformity? How fast and in what
direction is the “uniform” system of D&D evolving?

The answer to the 1st question is deceptively simple. The minimum
amount of uniformity required to make campaigns recognizable
and playable to all is virtually nil. For me it was just as easy and
enjoyable playing antediluvian pseudo- Chainmail D&D as playing
state-of-the-art Advanced D&D. Both were FRPGs, but they were from widely different universes. 
As long as the referee knows what’s coming down, there is no confusion. The principal
danger for a player steeped in the tradition of D&D is making
assumptions based on Advanced D&D rules that may not hold in
another game.

The 2nd question is not so easily answered. In fact, it probably
has no correct answer. The continuum variability-uniformity-conformity
cannot be polarized into good and bad. As pointed out above, vast
differences in GAME systems do not necessarily make campaigns unplayable
or less enjoyable.

On the other hand, extreme conformity does not doom a game
either. The games of Chess and Go enjoy great popularity despite
rigorously structured rules. Successive campaigns run by the same
referee have essentially identical foundations and rules, yet they are no
less playable or entertaining. Gay Gygax may accept the credit and
blame for the uniformity of the Advanced D&D project, but ultimately
the referees and players must decide what degree of uniformity is best
for them.

Despite a certain amount of “sameness” in all D&D, the game is
constantly changing. In an effort to determine how FAST and in what
direction D&D is evolving, I compiled a comparative list of some
important design features from the Fantasy supplement of Chainmail,
Original D&D, and Advanced D&D. My conclusions are entirely subjective
extrapolation.

The single overwhelming trend apparent from the listing is the
increase in all values through time. In less than a decade, the complexity
of D&D has risen enormously. This might be termed simulation
inflation, because the increase is due to attempts to simulate reality.
 
 

Design Feature	Chainmail  Fantasy SUPP.	D&D	AD&D	ADVANCED  DRAGONS && DUNGEONS  (1st Edition)
Character Classes	2	3	5(11)*	64
Alignment Variations	3	3	9	9
Listed Equipmnent	-	65 items	148 items	c. 1000?
Human Hit Dice	-	6-sided	4-10 sided	4-12 sided
Combat System	Hit = Kill	Hit = 1-6 points	Hits variable, typically 1-8 points	Hits variable, critical hits as well
Armor Types	-	-	9	AT 0 to AC10 is 11 Armor Types
Armor Classes	8	8	-	10 to -12 or maybe even lower
Melee Weapons	12	-	49	more than 50
Magic-User Spells	16	70	260**	c. 700?
Cleric Spells	0	26	154***	c. 300?
Monsters	23	69	350+	3000+
Treasure Types	3	131+	250+	moe than 250+
Healing Wounds	-	1 hit pt./2 days	1 hit pt/day;  5 hit pts./day after 30 days	As AD&D, note medicinal herbs & healing skill

* Eleven includes Druid, Paladin, Ranger, Illusionist, Assassin, Bard.
* * Including Illusionist spells.
* ** Including Druid spells.

Of course, in D&D the attempt is to simulate fantasy. Increasing
complexity, and hence, more accurate simulation, is counterbalanced
by a loss in playability. Most referees omit some standard material as
well as many of the optional items. This is strong evidence that the point
of equilibrium between accuracy and playability has been passed by
the Advanced D&D project. The beauty of it all is that the individual
campaign can be designed around the needs of the players, sacrificing
some material for one GAME and reincorporating it in the next.

No doubt there will continue to be a proliferation of new details.
Based on the numerical values in the list, one can expect an increase to
10 in the number of character classes, with subclasses doubling, in the
next 5 years. A 3rd dimension may be added to alignment, making
27 total variations. Standardized lists of equipment prices will exceed
300 items.

Human HD will continue to rise, and the combat system will
become increasingly complex with finer distinctions made between
armor classes <Armor Types, AT> and weapon type. For example, a character will possess
chainmail on the torso and left arm with leather on the right arm. He will <Piecemeal Armor>
fight with a single-bladed war axe and long dagger.

Predictably, spells will number in the thousands and up to 12 levels
of spells may be involved. The number of monsters should continue to
multiply, and any day now we can expect treasure type AA. The
number of magick items will be only slightly smaller than the number of
monsters.

Since both HD and the average amount of damage per hit will
have risen, the minimum rate of unassisted healing must increase in
proportion. <Recovery of HP>

The bottom line is that D&D is changing fast and probably will
change faster in the future, and that this CHANGE is toward a more
complex system. Players and referees will need to be more selective in
determining what aspects of the game to emphasize and which to tone
down or omit.