I love AD&D.
But I also understand that it started many of the problems we have with D&D today. Race-plus-class, the proficiency system eventually turning into a full skill system, overloaded classes with tiers of power, ability unlocks at certain levels, hit point inflation, multiclassing, and so many other issues started here. We started to see power creep, and 5E is defined by power creep.
When there was very little wrong with BX to begin with, and that game is the essence and heart of D&D. I am hesitant to use "D&D" since the current game isn't even D&D anymore, it is 5E, and BX is a truer statement of what the genre really is, and what makes it special.
A bunch of the problems that AD&D introduced were later ham-fistedly fixed in every edition that followed, and they still never fully fixed the issues it introduced. The Wizards team keeps trying to make a broken game fun, even though the original BX implementation was never broken. They will keep "fixing" D&D in edition after edition, when, like Monopoly, the original BX-based game is fun, isn't broken, and doesn't need to be changed.
AD&D is what I remember and love, but it is flawed, and those flaws get us to where we are today. It is still so much better than 5E, and it is the ultimate fantasy role-playing game. An amazing amount of depth, options, and it retains the classic, old-school experience? AD&D is the true fantasy role-playing game. But is it the best version of D&D?
But there is still something about BX that remains the gold standard. Where AD&D added special cases and rules for things that rarely come up, and tried to be the "de facto" convention ruleset, BX is still more flexible, easier for worldbuilding, and captures the essence of D&D with a much more straightforward framework.
BX is the far superior worldbuilder to AD&D.
AD&D is the best generic fantasy game.
But if I want to live in the world of D&D, BX is the truest expression of the ideas. The tropes are built into the classes. The classes build the world. Even if you do "race plus class" BX, it is a stronger expression of the original D&D idea, since stat and hit point inflation are under control. There is less to track and manage. The game is more about the story than the characters or the acquisition of power.
Doing "race plus class" confuses worldbuilding. Before, humans and halflings were the sneaky, stealthy, thieving types. This is their nature. Elves were the magic and battle types. Drarves didn't do the thieving stuff; it wasn't in their nature. Yes, this is a simple view of the world, but it is valid. Even DCC does the classic race-as-class designs, and these are valid and very thematic. So they are used in modern games, and even ACKS does amazing race-as-class options.
If you want a dwarven "tomb robber," make a race-as-class and give them abilities unique to both dwarves and tomb robbers. This will not be a thief and is unlikely to backstab. It will have unique abilities that enhance its core role in the game. Maybe they will have a bonus for fighting undead? This is how BX works: you create a race-specific role, and you design an amazing class that fills a niche and worldbuilds the race it belongs to.
Every BX class does heavy lifting in worldbuilding. Paladins? Human only, this is what humans do with crusades and holy knights. No other race gets involved with this. Bards? Human, again, and the entire concept of an elven or dwarven bard would be an entirely different thing. Dwarven Loremaster and Elven Spellweavers come to mind, and those would be much more thematic and do amazing worldbuilding.
AD&D classes give up, and while that gives the referee more options in creating the world, everything becomes more generic. There are "allowed race and class combinations," but we are one step away from "allowing anyone to be anything," and here we are in D&D 3E and further.
But, for generic fantasy, race-plus-class is fine and needed. In this world, we have Drow paladins. Fine. This is a choice. But allowing race-plus-class makes a LOT of choices you may not want made. You may not want Drow paladins. That may confuse your world's core conflicts. This may give the player too much narrative control. In a Dark Sun world with no Drow and no paladins, both are choices the world does not support.
Plus, allowing a Drow paladin all of a sudden shifts the game's narrative focus almost exclusively on that player and the conflict with the evil Drow. Some character stories will hijack the campaign and allow little room for other players to take part, or even for the referee to tell a standard fantasy story (especially if Drow are distrusted on the surface world, and the entire focus of the campaign shifts to that one character trying to prove themselves).
The original BX sidesteps all of that by strictly limiting race-as-class options. The game is easier to worldbuild and run stories in, since the stories write themselves and the conflicts stay out of the way of the dungeon crawl and adventure.
Old School Essentials also allows "anyone to be anything" with their optional rules, and those are useful for one-off classes and special PCs and NPCs. The Drow assassin comes to mind, along with the Dwarven cleric. I still love the race-as-class options, and they are very thematic and support worldbuilding like no other game.
5E gets everything wrong by allowing anyone to be anything and making all the races the same. It is magnitudes more difficult to worldbuild and play because of this.
AD&D started us down this road, and they did have strict race and class level limits to try to fix the problems that arose. But this is our first fix, one in a long line of many that lead to today.
As much as I love AD&D and 1E as a generic fantasy experience, BX is the purest form of the dungeon game.
No comments:
Post a Comment