Best DCC Support Books

The DCC books tell you to borrow like crazy from your other OSR and fantasy books. Specifically, the game does not have a treasure or magic item system and tells you to "use another game's tables." This is how we did it in the old days, too.

Since DCC is a game more like 3.5E, the 3.5E books are the best places to start. The D&D 3.5E DMG does not get enough love and attention, and this is one of the better DMG releases by Wizards since the book has treasure generation, encounter tables, magic item creation, lists of traps, and many other valuable bits for stocking an adventure site. There isn't a detailed dungeon random generation system, but it comes close. This is on my DCC shelf as part of my treasure and magic item system.

Another great and overlooked book is the 3.5E Magic Item Compendium, which provides Diablo-like unique properties and weapon qualities. If every magic item in DCC is supposed to be exceptional, then this book gives you the tables to generate those randomly.

Also, shout out to another tremendous 3.5E magic item generator, One Million Magic Items, which gives you even more randomness. This one is over on Drive-Thru.

One of the nice things about a 3.5E collection is that they act as excellent DCC support books and the best version of Wizards' D&D, so it's like having two games in one. I have Hero Lab and the 3.5E module, so my character creator support is there. Everything 4E and after ended up a mismanaged disappointment. I had some fun with 5E, but not as much fun as with DCC and 3.5E.

One could play DCC with the D&D 3.5E Monster Manual, and I made a page here covering conversion notes. This would likely be a deadlier campaign, depending on the encounter. What shocked me was how well this worked and how DCC could drop in and replace the D&D 3.5E rules engine.

Do I like 3.5E monsters in my 3.5E game? I feel more on the DCC side here; monsters should be unique and interesting, not "mass-produced" and feeling cookie-cutter.

DCC could run an entire Eberron campaign without a problem and run the setting better than 3.5E ever did. DCC fits right in with demons fighting robots, dinosaurs fighting elves, etc. Steampunk tech? Works with DCC, and there are zines with gun rules (The Crawl series). Since this setting is so unhinged and strange, DCC would match the tone better than a serious and heavyweight system. In DCC, you could also play as the dinosaurs if you wanted. Just come up with 3.5E ability score modifiers for them, call them a race of humanoid-sized dinosaurs, and go to town.

I would use Adventures Dark & Deep for the Realms and Greyhawk since the classic feel will do justice to those settings.

You could play DCC with 3.5E races since they are just a few ability score modifiers and special abilities. Simply eliminate race-as-class options and do the race-plus-class generation system. This is how you get Eberron races in the game, too. Most of the Player's Handbook is not used, except if you want a nice gear list, which is also helpful. Spells and classes are not used.

Another excellent book for DCC character options is the D&D 3.0 Savage Species book. If you want to ignore "race as class" and just throw a template onto a standard class, modify the ability scores, and this is your book. Note, humans will need a slight buff if you do this, such as letting them generate 4d6 and drop the lowest, since most will go for the special racial abilities and ignore the "plain old human" choice. This is an excellent book with 3.5E, and it lets you play all sorts of monster classes and different templates, even intelligent animals or hybrids.

A special shout-out goes to Pathfinder 1e's Advanced Race Guide, which has a race designer system. This book is more tightly tied to Pathfinder 1e's classes and feat systems, so it is not as highly recommended, but the designer is perfect for hackers and homebrewers.

While Pathfinder is an excellent resource for 3.5E content, I tend to let Pathfinder 1e stay in its own universe since the game is a complete monolith and fantastic as a standalone system. I have the system in my closet, and these days, I focus more on D&D 3.5E since that system never had the entire life it deserved. Pathfinder 1e is still an S-Tier game for me, but it is its own thing.

DCC plus D&D 3.5E is one of the best gaming combinations. D&D 3.5E is suitable for a serious, character-building game that fully uses Hero Lab and many of your books (and classic settings). However, D&D 3.5E is heavy; it is a simulation boardgame style of game.

DCC is for the times I don't want a lot of complexity and want to run fast and loose in a strange but gonzo fantasy Appendix N sword-and-sorcery romp. DCC is a faster game that does not care about "protecting player egos," which is a freedom for me. Do I care that the fighter grew a third eye by touching a strange statue or that the mage grew a pair of bat wings?

No. No, I don't.

Those are surprises and fun changes to the characters in my game, and I embrace them. Shadowdark rarely touches casters with permanent disfigurement and changes, and like 5E, it protects players from the game and avoids stepping on egos and "self-image" all that much. I don't want games that protect characters and player egos. If the designers are so afraid of their players' feelings being hurt, the game will end up in the garage storage crates. I am sick of them.

Even 3.5E has some of this "overly careful" design going on.

DCC is a game that embraces change and randomness. That is where my head is right now. Games that take the same character from one to maximum level, with zero change except powers and numbers, are boring.

Video: A conversation with Dr. Nicholas Caldwell of Iron Crown Enterprises (Rolemaster)

I found this video. It is a few months old, but it is a good discussion with the creators of Rolemaster about their current state as a company and game. They have an interesting relationship with the legacy material in that the rights to many of it were lost track of, and they can't get in touch with the original creators. So, they work with "the best way forward" and are trying to appeal to Classic and Standard System fans with the new version.

I get it. They have to make the game profitable, and they can't continue to support both old editions other than support preservation efforts. They need to move forward and unify the fanbase. People will still have their favorite editions, but as a business, they need to build for a profitable future to continue supporting the system and keeping the old books available.

A good video on a great company and their efforts to keep HARP and Rolemaster on game tables.

The Case for ADAD

Adventures Dark & Deep and OSRIC are mostly the same game.

But why play ADAD? OSRIC has a lot of support, but one of the best things about the OSR, first-edition, and B/X is that the games and numbers are mostly compatible. OSRIC adventures work perfectly with ADAD, so at this point, it is just a system preference.

Do you like the original, basic first-edition game? Play OSRIC.

Do you like a tuned, 1.5 Edition game with more stuff? Play ADAD.

ADAD has the better combat system, streamlined with weapon speed tied into initiative. This is nice, and the game plays more like the original creator wanted. Slower weapons will hit later in the combat round. ADAD also has an expansion skill system for roleplaying and between-session activities, and the skills do not control your turn-by-turn decisions. Anyone can try influencing people, and a referee may rule that a low CHR score is a bonus when trying to scare off others.

Rulings matter.

Not rules.

ADAD has the most stuff: new classes, more monsters, more magic items, and lots of expansion content pulled from magazine articles and forum posts. This keeps with the original Gygaxian intent and expansion wish list but sticks with the first-edition style. We get modernized classes, such as the bard and barbarian. It is hard to argue with more stuff since there is not much hardcover expansion content for first-edition games (outside of monsters).

The only argument against ADAD is wanting a simple game. Starting with OSRIC may be easier if you are new to the first edition. You will have a lot of 5E to unlearn, such as feeling the need to roll for everything. If there is no time pressure or real difficulty, just let the thief climb the wall or pick the lock without a roll! You don't need to make charisma checks for every interaction! Sometimes, hiding in shadows will work 100%, especially if your plan and hiding spot are excellent.

5E gives referees this horribly toxic habit of "using the dice to punish the players" and it sucks. Climbing a wall with a rope and grappling hook in exploration? Sorry, failed the roll! You fall and die! Ha-ha!

What are you doing?

5E also has the toxic concept of "passive skills," which protect players on their phones who ignore what is happening in the game. In the first edition, there is no passive skill for anything. You pay attention, tell the referee where you search, and you can find the scroll hidden under the cabinet without a roll.

90% of the die rolls in a first-edition game should be combat. The rest of the game is mostly "talk it out" and "make plans." You are not rolling dice every minute in a first-edition game session unless you are in combat.

In fact, your character can die without a single die roll in a first-edition game! You see a pit. My character jumps in! Your character dies.

In 5E, that will require 10 minutes of rules reference and probably six to twelve die rolls. Someone will levitate down with a healer's kit and revive you. Other players around the table will say, "Well, what about this rule or that action?" Someone will devise an ingenious plan way after the fact and try to force you into allowing them to attempt it, 30 minutes after everyone heard the thud.

What are you doing?

But you are not being fair by disallowing us to use the rules to retcon what the referee said happened! This game is about you and your choices, not the rules. Power does not come to you in this game by knowing the rules and how to abuse them. Your success or failure will not be decided by that book.

The dice are not toys that are constantly rolled for every action and interaction. You will never see a "game show roulette wheel" pop up with a musical d20 every time your character interacts with people or the environment. This is not a pen-and-paper mobile phone game.

I like what ADAD brings to the table. This game is also nearly identical to OSRIC if you just play with the OSRIC-familiar things. The extra stuff is ultimately optional, but it helps fill out the game to appeal to some of the later additions, such as the bard class. This game also has some of the Creative Commons' familiar 5E material converted to 1E.

The game is also written by a Greyhawk expert, so it feels right at home in classic settings. And since this is first-edition, nobody will become an unkillable GMNPC or immortal player character. People needing to fear the world, monsters, traps, and dungeons is perfect. Even the highest level wizard is not invincible, so high-level player characters must still play smart.

Don't cheat the rules; you will have a world where everyone is at risk and needs to be careful. Even the highest-level Elminster could be killed anytime, blow his resurrection roll, and the world would change. Action does not come without risk. Change will happen. This means a spot for the next hero will open, and that position as the "high magister" will be open for you.

Do not cheat or fudge rolls! This is how we get unkillable, no-fun, super characters! And I loathe the term "fantasy superheroes" as an excuse for poorly designed rules where no risk or danger exists. You don't need a game or rules at that point; just toss dice on a table and say what you want to happen.

Every version of D&D from the 2nd Edition has GMNPCs, and everyone was encouraged to "cheat the system for player fun!" What ended up happening was that players were the ones who were cheated out of the original game's fun. In 5th Edition, you get to play an invincible GMNPC.

You don't want to be an invincible supercharacter. Trust me, it is boring.

I leave those games and return to what I know and love.

ADAD would make a fantastic system to run a Forgotten Realms campaign with a sense of realism and deadly consequences. If you look at the cover of the original boxed set, you will see that the first edition was the setting that it was designed for. This is how we played our original Forgotten Realms setting. Greyhawk was the super-character playground, with a level 100 setting, while the Realms were supposed to be low-magic, realistic, and gritty dark fantasy.

What is the case for ADAD?

You have it all in two books, everything you need for a classic Greyhawk or Realms campaign, before they were spoiled by power gaming, fantasy superheroes, or modern "character build" gaming. You get a good selection of classes, some new, and others people expect. You get the CC-licensed content converted back into first-edition. You get a streamlined combat system that emphasizes weapon speed and initiative. Unlike every modern version of D&D, the game doesn't self-destruct after ten levels.

You can play a first-edition game in a first-edition world.

You can really go back to those days.

The chance to go back in time is a more memorable gift than most books you can buy in gaming.

Roll20 Solo: Going Digital

As an experiment, I took down my gaming table, removed all the giant maps, cleared everything off, plopped down a large monitor, and hooked up a computer. I also managed the cables to make it all look nice.

I left room for books and a dice tray, but no physical maps or figures were on the table - just the monitor and computer. I then fired up Roll20 and used that as my "game table" on the computer.

I mostly play solo, so giving up my game table for another "computer workstation" was a radical change. But I promised myself no "PC gaming" here; this is just a virtual game table setup, as if I were streaming and DM-ing from this table. This is why I left a lot of empty room on the table, no knick-knacks, no piles of notebooks, no figures, and no clutter.

I have a part of the table reserved for books I use during play. On the other side of the table, I have one dice tray with a premium set of dice, in case I want to roll something off VTT from a table in a book or check my yes/no oracle dice. Nothing else goes on this table.

One monitor. One laptop. A mouse and mousepad.

The rest of the 60x30 table is empty for gaming books and dice, as I need them. I clear it off when I'm not playing a game and put it on a shelf.

During the session, I limited my computer apps to my music player, Roll20, the windows it can spawn, and my PDF reader. This computer just needs to run a webpage, so it did not need to be anything fancy—just a machine that works well enough and can get my session running. I uninstalled programs that distract me, compete for time, or give me "other fun things to do." Social media use is not allowed on this machine during my play time.

I embraced "distraction-free gaming" and kept it simple. Like Shadowdark's rules design, I tossed out anything I did not need or that distracted from the experience.

It feels strange to use Roll20 as a solo gamer, and I know, find a group! But in the odd times I play, having something that 'saves my game" and provides a log of everything that happened last session is invaluable.

I also like Roll20 since it is more than "just D&D." This gives me a VTT and character sheets for many games, and I can also "wing it" if I want and just play without official character sheets. You can't buy GURPS or have "official support" on Roll20, but there is a good community-created character sheet, and it is not hard to make it work well on this system.

It also feels strange to use the dropdown to set "my current player" or even "set myself as referee." However, I still do this since going back and reading my chat log, rolls, attacks, damage, skill rolls, and other information I type in is invaluable. This means "talking to myself as DM" in the chat, just to keep track of what is happening, the start of encounters, and the results of actions, but I keep my notes and "flowery language" to the point, so it is not too much work.

A DM and players "must announce what is happening or their current action."

As a DM, describe the results of attacks or skill rolls.

As a player, clearly state actions.

Also, as a DM, let player skill rolls "simmer a while." If a player makes a successful check to sneak or hide, if that check succeeds, don't keep rolling a skill check every turn. Let the result stay around for a while until the situation changes. I made a sneak roll for agility for a player, rolled a 19 vs. a DC 15, and let that player remain hidden for the scene, even when they followed the monsters into another scene.

Thematically and story-wise, that skill roll should have a reasonable narrative duration.

You don't roll for every foot of progress when climbing a rope.

This method also reduced the pain of playing on a VTT since making endless rolls for every little thing, every step of the way, and every minute of the day is a terrible, grindy, slow, and sickening way to play. This is also the problem of "passive skills" since they assume an "always on" mindset; they imply that dice rolls for everything should always happen every turn. In my story, that character "creeping and following" made an excellent die roll, giving the character "sneaky status" until things change, making sense and speeding play.

You are a terrible referee if you force players to roll for the same thing twice (and nothing has changed). All you are trying to do is screw the players with the dice. Roll once and let it stand.

On the flip side, if the players fail, let that stand, and don't let them roll for the same thing twice. Find another way, another skill, or just figure out how to move forward.

Your dice rolls should mean something.

You get one die roll and stand by it.

Stop playing with the dice and rolling them repeatedly until you get the desired result. Your dice will lose their power. Imagine playing Monopoly that way.

That isn't gaming.

If you ever need to re-roll for a better result, stop and say, "GM Fiat!" Then, just say what happens without rolling another die. You will save a lot of heartache this way, and your dice will retain their mystical powers.

I treat the chat logs as my game log; typing them all in seems painful. Later, however, coming back and reading "what I said as DM" and "how a character reacted" makes the little extra effort worth it. Typing "I sneak to the treasure chest" as a character, creating a roll, and having the DM say, "You sneak over and find..." seems like more work at the time, but later on when I fire up the session again, the game is right there, and what I typed in becomes my journal.

When you play solo, it is not all "free-form mind play," that is one of the quickest ways to fail at solo gaming. Without a journal, I find my solo games all fall apart. With my Roll20 games and chat logs and having the character sheets stored online, I see everything is waiting for me to return to it and pick up right where I left off. I can have a few games running at a time.

When I started this, it seemed utterly counterintuitive.

• Why would I give up my gaming table?
• I love figures, dice, maps, and pawns!
• Nothing beats tactile, real-world play!
• The online tools and character sheets never work right!
• This is going to be more work and hassle for no benefit!

And then, I made the commitment. I am "going digital" while keeping my books and ability to roll dice outside the machine. I knew this was the right choice when I discovered how much dust was gathering on my table. My games take zero space in my room, I can switch between a few of them, and I am learning to work with the tools and systems so I will be ready to play online with others, should that come up.

I am playing more now.

I use my physical books, PDFs, and real-world dice much more. Even when gaming on a monitor, I still like to have my real-world books and dice to use, and they help me feel like I am playing the game.

Going digital was one of the best decisions I have made regarding gaming.

Shadowdark: Western Reaches, Breaks a Million

Congratulations to the Shadowdark team for breaking a million dollars on their Kickstarter on their first day for the Western Reaches expansion! They hit the mark in 12 hours, which is fantastic, and this is what happens when you put quality, respect, a love of the game, and community first.

There is a lot of bad news, especially around D&D, but this is a ray of hope coming through the dark clouds for the hobby.

This helps the OSR and lifts all boats, just like D&D does. Shadowdark draws far more D&D players from that game than it does OSR people from theirs, and the size of this market can be deceiving. This is a massive influx of OSR players from 5E, and they will branch out and try other games. Every OSR game will see a bump from this, and Shadowdark will keep many disaffected D&D players in the hobby.

Congratulations!

DCC, 3.5E, and B/X Numbers

When I first got DCC, I assumed the game was "tuned" around OSR and B/X numbers regarding attack bonuses and hit points. The game is more tuned around 3.5E-style numbers, hit points, and attack bonuses. I use the fire giants of three games to compare values with:

• DCC Attack Bonus: +22
• OSE Attack Bonus: +10
• 3.5E Attack Bonus: +20

The attack bonuses, minus multi-attacks, are comparable. They are baseline double B/X.

• DCC average hp: 80
• OSE average hp: 51
• 3.5E average hp: 142

D&D 3.5E hit points are around double what DCC gives. Compared to B/X, OSE has about 1.5 times the hit points.

• DCC attack damage: 4d10+10, 32 average
• OSE attack damage: 5d6, 18 average
• 3.5E attack damage: 3d6+15 (3 attacks), 26 average, 78 maximum total (52 realistic)

The 3.5E damage maximum is deceptive since it assumes that last +10 attack hits, so it is closer to 52 for two attacks. So DCC is in the middle, with 1.5 times less and more for OSE and 3.5E.

• DCC AC: 17
• OSE AC: 15
• 3.5E AC: 23

AC values are closer to B/X on the low levels, but ancient dragons in 3.5E and DCC are around AC 40. AC is too high in 3.5E by about five points for DCC.

Don't enter this realm if you are afraid of math!

So if you convert from OSE, double the attack bonus, multiply attack damage, and hit points by 1.5 times. AC is about the same. If converting down from 3.5E, use the same attack bonus, halve the hit points, reduce damage by 1.5 times, and AC is about 70% at the lower levels, and for boss monsters, they are about equal to 3.5E.

Low-end 3.5E monsters are okay with DCC. A 3.5E orc is AC 13, +4 attack, and 2d4+4 damage. An OSE orc is AC 13, +0 attack, and 1d6 damage. A DCC orc is AC 11 (you could armor them up, too), +1 attack, and 1d8+1 damage.

This is why I like the first edition and B/X games like OSE. Even AD&D 2nd Edition started increasing monster hit points, but nothing beats the original game's flat numbers and lower modifiers. Every version of Wizards D&D has been on a hit-point inflation track for the last 25 years.

DCC is a 3.5E game since the dragon AC numbers can scale up to 40, and the hit point and damage numbers are higher than OSE. If you are converting from 3.5E to DCC, use a 50% hp, -5 AC, half-damage attacks, and if monsters have multiple attacks, dice chain them down from the d20. DCC being aligned with 3.5E makes sense since Goodman Games published so many 3.5E modules.

DCC can replace all of my third-edition games since it is essentially a replacement game that is more old-school focused and isn't as structurally broken as D&D 3.5E. I enjoy DCC more than I do 3.5E, but I still have my 3.5E books out, while 4E and 5E sit in the garage. Having my 3.5E books out means I can play them apart or together as an option, and the DCC and 3.5E combo gives me the best of Gonzo and Wizards D&D on my shelf, and the games work together well.

Shadowdark: Western Reaches Kickstarter

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/shadowdarkrpg/western-reaches

The Shadowdark: Western Reaches Kickstarter went live today, and wow, there are a lot of premium-quality, lovely things in this campaign. They are collecting the expanded rules in the Cursed Scroll Zines to add as official parts of the game and creating their own campaign setting for everything.

This feels like "Advanced Shadowdark" without the complex rules and just "more stuff."

If you go "all in," it is a bit pricy, but considering the quality of the components and everything you get, it is an ideal gift for the true Shadowdark fan.

I hope this setting takes on a life of its own and becomes a springboard for novels, adventures, and other stories, much like the Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk. Shadowdark will be my "5E game" and the inheritor of my dreams and ideas in the 5E space.

Too dark and deadly? Mod it to be more heroic. The game embraces change, ownership of your game, and unique play style. Want more character power for super-heroic games? Mod it. Are there any pulp play options? In the book. The game can still be deadly while embracing a more pulp-adventure style.

I hope for a big campaign for this one since games that respect the old-school, while inviting in the world's 5E players, are suitable for everyone playing together and provide a sorely needed bright spot in place of D&D 2024's falling flat with many.

I hope this prints and delivers quickly! I also hope there are no issues with tariffs, which have been a sore spot in fulfillment for many projects these days, and no extra added costs.

Shadowdark is worthy. This game pulls in far more 5E players than old-school gamers, just due to the size of the 5E market, and introduces many to our old-school world. It is a gateway game, and making this your primary system is very comfortable. I can teach and play with anyone in 5 minutes and work almost anywhere, from VTTs to chat rooms.

Shadowdark is 5E to me.

We also have the DCC Dungeon Denizens II Kickstarter next week, so this will be a good week for old-school 5E and 3.5E crowdfunding here in 2025.

The Case for OSRIC

The "more" game isn't always the "better" game.

There is a case for sticking with OSRIC and not moving to a "stuff" game like Adventures Dark & Deep.

Over the years, I find "alt classes" - like the bard and others- to weaken a party and dramatically increase the challenge. Some may like that, but the more specialized classes you have, the more players want to explore them, and the balance of the game's core classes gets lots in the shuffle.

It is like someone wanting to be a barbarian but not realizing that they will be taking a lot of damage due to their lack of armor, and then the party's healer will rush to keep up. The balance, power use, healing, and everything else around a party that would be fine with an armored fighter is suddenly thrown out of whack with a barbarian.

The same goes for specialty mages whose damage output does not match a pure magic user. All of a sudden, the specific situation the mage excels in isn't combat, and that damage potential drops, making encounters harder on the party. The same goes for thieves versus bards. In some games, the designers do a good job and ensure the damage is there, but the original first-edition rules got it right with the base classes.

It is the same for specialty healers or special-function divine classes that cannot heal as well as healers. The more specialized the class, the more niche the role, and the less the character can contribute to the party - thus altering the game's balance.

Sometimes, "keeping it simple" makes the game easier for everyone and reduces the workload on new players who ask, " What does that class do?" Shadowdark has only four classes in the book, and the game plays great. Keeping it simple works, and it makes the game better.

If you want to be a bard, simply say your cleric, fighter, thief, or magic user has a musical background as a performer. If this ability may help or be used, roll for it. If you give everyone a free background profession, someone could pick blacksmith, another survivalist, etc. You will get most of the fun and utility of a "skill system" without needing one in your game.

Does someone want a new skill? Sure, 6 months to a year of training in your off-adventure time, and it is yours. That is how it is done in real life; you spend time, apprentice, and attend school. It may cost tuition or money to pay for an apprentice and materials. All the skills "specialist henchmen" have can be taught to you, and there is your "skill list."

Or you could give a free "skill level" like this at every character level, either in a new skill or a +1 in an existing one. This is a first-edition game, mod at will.

You can have "role specialization" within the existing classes just by "saying it is so." Do bards always need "magic songs?" No. A fighter with a bard background sings in battle, and those die rolls during combat trying to weave songs for special effect will be "the player describes what they want to happen" and "the referee rules on it, and may call for a roll or not."

I sing, so the whole party gets a +1 hit and damage!

Okay, you do. No roll needed. No spell is required. You just do.

I sing to calm the owlbear! Okay, roll for that since there is a chance of failing and worsening the situation.

By default, you should not be "rolling for everything" in an old-school game, especially if you have the skill or equipment. It is punitive and player-punishing and minimizes the choices and sacrifices players make. Did you buy a rope and grappling hook, give up part of your backpack to haul it through the dungeon, and wait for your chance to use it?

Why did the referee make you roll to climb when you used it?

You could have climbed that wall without a rope and grappling hook - with a roll.

No roll is needed; you climb the wall because you made a choice, suffered with carrying it around, and used it at an appropriate time. I swear, these bad game designers came around and "skill rolled" every action, no matter the choice or situation, which hurt roleplaying.

No, it is not a +8 because you have excellent equipment. It is "No, you do not need to roll." Think about watching a Conan movie where this guy hauls around a rope and grappling hook for the whole film, and then reaches the moment he can finally use it! He fails his climbing roll, falls off, and dies. I am not watching a Conan film; I am watching a Mel Brooks comedy movie. That is horrible refereeing.

The same thing applies to backgrounds; many actions with them will be automatic. Only roll when the outcome cannot be reasonably assumed or a reasonable chance of failure exists.

That bard background is just as valuable as all others since parties need to survive in the wilderness, repair armor, smith metal, perform diplomacy, know lore, apply non-divine medicine, and all the other skills parties need.

All your fancy "game designer" bard powers are wrapped up in a background choice within the classic first-edition framework, and no extra rules are needed. Any class can be a bard, fighter, thief, magic user, cleric, or paladin.

D&D 2024 Not Selling Well?

I am not buying 2024.

Also, I don't really care.

With the 2014 edition, I purchased six books with that system: the three core, Tasha's, and two others in the second gift set. All the rest of my books were Open 5E, and the damage was done.

I know a few who upgraded, but they were more "for the love of the game" and to support their hobby. Many I see in comment sections will never buy the game due to many factors, including the OGL.

We can't make a final judgment at this point. It is too early, and many were waiting for all the books to be released before deciding to buy. Some financial statements look grim, and many use that as clickbait. We must wait for Q1 2025 statements, a mass firing, or another major shakeup.

Don't try to read Wall Street's tea leaves; you will go insane. The place does not work under the standard profitability assumptions, and its value definition can change on a dime. A company can sustain itself on promises, having and owning nothing, until another company comes along and gobbles it up to own the "value."

There's nothing there, there.

Yet, billions of dollars still change hands for "it."

I just saw another 5E YouTuber I follow walk away from the D&D game. The game is in freefall at this point. It is over once YouTube tells content creators to make videos about something other than D&D. Another day goes by, and I see more of the community quitting and walking away. It feels like a tsunami as the days go by.

This is going to wipe out a lot of good companies and creators.

I see the Wizard's VTT previews and the new starter set (by noted creators), which had less than 1,000 views on the first day. Some haven't even broken 100 views in the first hour.

The era of slapping D&D on a video and having it get tens of thousands of views is over.

I have not been happy with Open 5E. It works, but it inherits all the problems of D&D. The worst feature is the need for computerized character sheets, and the clones never have a great system that supports all the options needed to build characters. That said, Tales of the Valiant is the best-supported Open 5E out there and worthy of your support if you stay with 5E.

Later, 5E books introduced terrible rules, and the clones adopted them.

Tool proficiencies did it in for me. That was a hack for a game that needed a sound skill system but could not support it. Instead of going to college for four years to study a trade, all I need is to be skilled with the "tools," which shows the experience the game designers have with real-world trades and professions.

I bought an automotive tool kit on Amazon. Sure, I can fix your car!

Here is a box with a pencil, paper, notebook, journal, and an ink pen with a well of ink—a writer's kit. Get a tool proficiency in that, and you can be Hemingway or Shakespeare.

Some classes can even swap tool proficiencies on a rest.

I miss the days when games had great skill systems designed to support the theme of the game. And they weren't huge lists, either. They were designed to open avenues of action, force hard choices, and not limit players but enable them to solve problems. Many games have abused skill systems over the years, too. Giving me 500 skills is not game design. Please do not make this a choice between longsword skill and basket-weaving.

Tool proficiencies are as broken as the bonus action and multiclassing. It is time to clean house in the rules of 5E and simplify them again because the "professional" game designers got their hands on them, making the game too difficult to play and create character concepts in. What you say you want to do has to be filtered through chapters of "game designer great ideas" instead of the rules getting out of the way and "allowing you to do what you said you wanted to do."

After the original 5E designers left, the game had no chance, and we ended up with the 2024 rules, which feel like a duct-taped-together collection of great ideas with no idea how they all work together. It is the "Homer's Car" of role-playing games. Weapon masteries feel like tool proficiencies all over again. Bastions are even worse, and herald mobile-phone game design features coming into the game.

Beware of these games that force you through the rules to do the thing you wanted to do. If breathing was allowed, they would create special rules for it, a unique action you would need to take every turn.

I am back in the first edition; save for a few, the rest of these modern games are in the garage.

Wraparound

For me, 6th Edition D&D is First Edition AD&D.

The plot is lost, there have been too many changes, orcs are not orcs, the most-poplar half-elf and half-orc races have been thrown into the memory hole, the game has lost touch with modern haircuts and clothing, and I refuse to touch corporate D&D, or the 5.5E. The game feels like it tries to sell us ideas that were popular four years ago. The game has lost touch, and all the changes Wizards made from 3.0 to 5.5 have led us here.

Wizards D&D, for me, ended at 5th Edition, and was forked and picked up on by the Open 5E alternatives, like Tales of the Valiant and Level Up Advanced 5E. Those are my 5E books, now, and the writing was on the wall since the OGL. Wizards was not a good steward of the IP, they broke the trust of the community when they tried to take back the OGL, and everyone knew what was coming next.

There was this silent promise by Wizards to be a good member of the community. Keeping the OGL and SRD out there, untouched, so the community could thrive was a part of that. This trust is now broken.

Besides, D&D 3.5E is the best version of "Wizards D&D," crafted by the Magic the Gathering original team, and perfected to its broken and messy state. If you want Wizard's D&D, stick with the original and ignore the last 20 years of mess, tabletop MMOs, and memory-holing.

5E was the "pandemic RPG" and the system ended when Wizards "changed the terms of the deal" on the community. These days, play Open 5E if you can and have a clear conscious.

Just, please, avoid the rampant hoarding, collecting, and other plagues that befall 5E at the moment. If you own more than a few books your game is at serious risk of never being played and only "had" to collect. At that point, you are better off parting with it.

So where do I go from here?

I have been exploring AD&D first edition, and rediscovering OSRIC and Adventures Dark & Deep. Going back to first edition feels like a refreshing reset, no matter how complex or pedantic these games can be, these were the first, the 8-bit retro experience, and the way I remembered playing dungeon games.

There is something wonderful about first edition.

I feel like I do when I play an 8-bit game, all of today's slickness is stripped away, and I am left with pure gameplay. I am not leaning on action types, power-dip multi-classing or subclass abilities - there are none. I don't have a complex character sheet that needs a computer to create, I have a simple sheet done by hand. It feels like a classic NES or Sega Genesis gamepad in my hands, with a D-pad and a few buttons, and nothing else fancy.

The DM asks me, "What do you do?"

I am not staring at my character sheet, looking for an answer.

The answer lies inside my head, my imagination, and the situation I am presented with. The answer to "what do you do" is not filtered through Wizard's rules, and that "thought filtering" has been the design goal from D&D 3.0 on. The answer to "what do you do" with the first edition is inside my head.

D&D 5E was only as popular as it was because they rolled that "mind control through rules" back some from 4E (where actions were 'what power card am I using?'), and players' minds were free to decide for themselves. But book by book, that control came back bit by bit. With 5.5E, they have locked it all down again. You can't build a "hammer guy" without jumping through their hoops, picking a few required selections, and even then, the hammer fights you by pushing enemies away. "Best builds" and "action economy" became the "measure of good play."

In my day, the "good play" was in a player's head.

The first edition has that unlimited, unchecked, the answer is not in the book pure thought-to-action goodness that created the hobby. If your actions are controlled by a labyrinth of rules in a book, you are not role-playing. Game designers use thought control on you; you are "discovering" what they already know, plan, and mean for you to do.

You can't be a hero unless you first run your thoughts through a few layers of Wizard's rules.

With the first edition, what is between you and heroic action is minimal. You don't need to run your action plan through several book chapters of rules. You don't need to account for bonus actions or free actions. You are not considering weapon masteries. You are not chaining together actions to combo up the best attack. You don't need to make your heroism fit through Wizards' rules approval process.

Understand what we have dealt with for the last 25 years of West Coast game design, and your mind will be clear.

People have gotten confused and defended 3.5E versus 4E versus 5E versus 5.5E, and nobody sees that they are all the same design style but in a few different flavors. Some people cannot even imagine taking an action on a turn without running it "through the rules first." This is why game turns take 30 minutes for some people, and deciding what to do feels like signing and initialing 200 pages of forms to buy a car or a house.

The first edition does not have any of those concepts. The game never even had a rule for ability checks, though some now do since they were commonplace back then. What do you do? You come up with an idea. You do it. The referee says what happens. The amount of rulebook interaction with that sequence is minimal to none, and it is kept that way for a reason.

I was already moving in this direction, going back a few D&D editions, to 3.5, to 2nd, and finally, back home in AD&D first edition, and the modern retro-clones of this game. In my opinion, the classic Adventures Dark & Deep system is the best.

D&D is a loop from the first edition to the fifth. The true sixth edition is the first one, and I have wrapped around and returned to what I love.

For me, 6th Edition D&D is First Edition AD&D....

ADAD vs. OSRIC

OSRIC vs. ADAD?

What is the difference?

Game-engine-wise, there is not that much of a difference. There may be a few things around armor vs. weapon types, initiative, classes, spells, numbers, and other fiddly bits - but the core game engines are the same. 

There is a minor difference in the combat engine being more streamlined in ADAD vs. OSRIC, and I prefer ADAD's streamlined combat which integrates weapon speed much better. The fact weapon speed it directly tired into initiative means the system Gygax wanted us to have (with speed factor) has been implemented in a way that does not seem like a penalty, and it is easy to manage and use. I would use ADAD's combat system with OSRIC, most likely.

The modules work the same, monsters work the same, spells work the same, and they are 99% compatible. Either OSRIC or ADAD is a solid choice.

The significant differences are in options, and the most considerable differences are in the new skill system and the classes available. To begin, OSRIC's class list is as follows:

• Assassin
• Cleric
• Druid
• Fighter
• Illusionist
• Magic User
• Paladin
• Ranger
• Thief

ADAD has all of those, plus:

• Bard
• Jester
• Skald
• Cavalier
• Blackguard
• Vates
• Mystic
• Barbarian
• Savant
• Acrobat
• Mountebank

The ADAD Darker Path expansions add:

• Witch
• Necromancer
• Demonolater

What sells me on ADAD over OSRIC is having a first-edition bard and barbarian class, plus many more to explore and play with. If you don't need those, keep your life simple and play OSRIC. If you have 5E players wanting more class options and choices, then ADAD is the better game.

ADAD is the "more stuff" game, reflecting the first edition at the end of its lifecycle when it was expanded and fully matured. OSRIC was the game when it started, with just the first three books.

Me? I will go for the "more stuff" since I played AD&D back in the day, and I have campaigns that will use those new classes. The only thing missing is new race selections and more modern designs, but I can create these with Grok 3 and beta them myself.

ADAD typically expands every area it explores, from spells, equipment, strongholds, and weapons—it is all more and expanded. Is "more" better? You need to answer that for yourself.

For those wanting an easier and more streamlined game, playing OSRIC will be the better choice since the options and choices are just the classic selections. Both are on my shelves. ADAD is the apparent "more stuff" game, so it keeps me busy exploring new options. OSRIC will always be my "Old School Essentials" version of the first edition.

ADAD has a skill system where you "pay XP" to get non-combat profession-like skills for your character. This is a more in-depth roleplaying style character improvement than OSRIC. Again, this falls into the "more stuff" theme of the game, and if you don't want that extra system, stick to OSRIC.

There is an OSRIC argument for "keeping it simple" and only focusing on the original first-edition content. From this point, you could expand the game and keep your core experience as streamlined and narrowly focused as possible.

Myself?

Both games are on my shelf, alongside my first-edition books. They all support each other.

ADAD does things the best, for me.

ADAD: A Strange Excitement in the Air

I don't know what it is about Adventures Dark & Deep that has me pumped up; I haven't been this excited about a game in a long while. On the surface, it is a first-edition retro-clone, only a bit crunchier and in-depth.

There isn't that much to buy for it either. I have all the books, and the print versions are coming here.

What is it about this game? I swear it has an "it factor," that psychic feeling I get about a game before it gets big. Granted, the Kickstarter for this wasn't astronomical, but the game has the pedigree and a designer knowledgeable in the game and subject.

I can't wait to play this.

If I look back, AD&D was always a game I liked. And yes, GURPS did replace it. That story of Greyhawk, the Forgotten Realms, and the world's lore. My problem is that 5E feels like "false lore" in my experience, the "video game version" of a world I once knew. All the powers saved and the effects of magic spells are done on 6-second turns, and in AD&D, some of these durations were minutes. If you were hit by a charm or hold person spell, that was it - this was not being "thrown off" the next turn.

5E is even more of a video game than 4E was, and the entire game is built around the "six-second combat clock." This turn-by-turn game is not classic D&D or AD&D but pen-and-paper video gaming.

With ADAD, I am finally looking back into these worlds as I knew them back in the day. Sure, I could always play them with Old School Essentials or even Castles & Crusades, but those are a few steps removed from what I remember.

ADAD, being based on a first-edition framework, hits differently. It has an authenticity to it, and I felt I was missing. It feels low-magic when, by all accounts, it shouldn't.

And this isn't the second edition, where the power-gaming splat books flowed like wine, and all the GMNPCs were unkillable. In our first-edition game, Elminster felt vulnerable and weak and needed care and caution when approaching a problem. He was over 500 years old and a 26th-level magic-user by the rules and the original campaign book. By the rules, he will have 50-60 hp. He needs to use cloth armor; even with all that magic, he is still fragile.

We never saw him as a problem since the AD&D rules put a cap on his power. He could still lose initiative and get hit with an arrow of slaying. He is so old that his system shock and resurrection chances will be low. Many evil factions want him. His physical scores are not that high, so he is slow, weak, and frail.

Even if "he was touched by the gods," he should have been "called back home" long ago because he sets a negative precedent for the game world. Because Elminster exists, N+1 unkillable GMNPCs exist. This all started in AD&D 2nd Edition when the power gaming crept in.

How do you fix the GMNPC problem in the Forgotten Realms?

How about playing by the rules in the book?

And not "touching characters by the gods" to the point they become superheroes? Everything has a cost, and life only lasts so long - even by the rules in AD&D, which put a cap of 120 years on humans.

If you have unkillable GMNPCs, you are probably not playing by the rules in the book, making some ridiculous decisions as a referee, and not increasing the cost of benefits granted to characters. Like a credit card, those referee-granted boons have a price, and the bill comes due someday. For him to be over five times his age, where he would generally be "called home by the gods to serve as the Celestial Librarian," he has to have some severe limits on his actions and significant limitations to his magic.

Characters who become living gods get called home.

The world is for mortals.

And if push came to shove, I would have ruled that for our Realms campaign for all PCs who got above the 20th level. You are summoned to the "Hall of Heroes" or the "Lair of Infamy," you do planar adventures all day, but you aren't allowed to wreck a world made for mortals. Even Dragon Lance's setting said that if you got above a certain level, you were removed from the mortal world and sent elsewhere.

I don't care how many books the character sells; encouraging this isn't good for the game. But, again, when we followed AD&D rules for this world, we never had a problem with these NPCs. Follow the rules for magic by the book, and you realize "casting a wish spell while in combat" will not happen. In AD&D 2nd Edition, we saw the problem.

And it feels like they took the GMNPC syndrome of unkillable, overpowered, and insufferable characters and built 5E to be that game. If you are playing a game with unkillable GM NPCS, you are either not playing by the rules, fudging your rolls, or playing 5E.

If you have unkillable PCs or NPCs in your game or have been playing for years and no character has died, you are not playing the game by the rules.

Or you are playing 5E.

I swear, this is why some kids could not handle the game in the 1980s. They got too invested, and it is just like getting too invested in Monopoly and flipping the board if you see yourself losing. Now, all of 5E caters to the "flip the board" crowd, and they encourage investing yourself in the game to a point where it causes health issues.

This is why cheating the game, fudging rolls, or breaking the rules isn't good. It ends up destroying your world. Your world has a finite amount of legitimacy and authenticity. Letting characters like Elminster turn into GMNPCs and unkillable problem-solvers and the hero who steps in and says, "Let us handle this," like the Avengers, makes you look like a terrible referee and destroys your world.

The first edition feels like this is the other path. The other way to go. A game where superheroes don't rule the multiverse. A game where normal people rise to be heroes, grow old, build strongholds, retire, and begin the next generation of heroes again. A game where even the powerful feel vulnerable.

Gods are gods, and mortals are mortals.

In a first-edition world, everyone dies from a short, heroic life or old age in their stronghold as they pass the kingdom. The rules help tell the story of the world, not just one character.

The focus on "me and my power" in 5E is the fundamental flaw of the game.

ADAD feels like I could return to our original version of the Realms and explore that world again without all the drama and power-gaming. The same goes for Greyhawk or any other classic setting. Could I do this with OSRIC or even the original first-edition rules?

I could.

I was already moving in this direction with OSRIC. This is still a highly legitimate first-edition game, especially for those who do not want changes to the core system. OSRIC is the first edition's Old School Essentials. ADAD expands upon the game as part "what if" and part "what could be?"

ADAD just accelerated where I was headed.