We kicked off our Hawkmoor campaign using Swords & Wizardry recently and after just a session I had to reevaluate the rules system (not the edition). I really like S&W and can't recommend it highly enough. In fact, had I not invested time and money into the actual OD&D rules and supplements for this edition from TSR (Holmes "Basic" and Monster & Treasure Assortment) and Judges Guild (Ready Ref Sheets), I would be running S&W without hesitation. BUT...I have seen the path. And that path, as dictated by my game designer heart, is not to rely on someone else's interpretation of the rules with omissions that they don't like/use. Rather, I will use the rules as presented in original 1974 Dungeons & Dragons, with influences from Chainmail, the OD&D supplements, Strategic Review, Dragon, Judges Guild and other 1970s D&D sources to play my version/interpretation of the game whilst attempting to cleave as close the source and design intent as possible. I absolutely believe that this is in the true nature of that '60s and '70s gaming mindset that I wish to emulate and capture.
Naturally, my gaming brain has been influenced by all that came after 1974 and this will naturally flow into my game (e.g., my encumbrance system). But that's ok...good in fact. If I take the very solid foundation of 1974 and extrapolate from there and cover the many gaps left by the texts, then I have the core of "my" D&D. It will also be the basis of the D&D we play as a family and what I plan on running as an open-table campaign at our FLGS in the future (or at least will be attempting to run).
I considered making this post much longer and detailing the rules interpretations and additions I'm using, but have decided against that long-winded approach. Instead, I will write posts about each section/aspect of the game as it arises at the table and thus combine a rules post with a campaign story update. This post was more about explaining my thought processes behind the change and why it works best for me.
I will leave you with a list of the three main starting PCs from our Hawkmoor family campaign.
Player Character 1 (run by my 15-year-old son)
Rhonar Fendris, male elf Fighter/Magic-User, Lawful
Best abilities: Strength (15), Intelligence (15), Charisma (14), Wisdom (13)
Worst ability: Dexterity (6)
Player Character 2 (run by my 12-year-old daughter)
Varia, female human Cleric of the Cult of Illurios and the Order of the Enduring Dawn, Lawful
Best abilities: Wisdom (16), Constitution (13)
Worst ability: Dexterity (10)
Player Character 3 (run by my 5-year-old son...with some occasional guidance of course)
Cormac, male human Fighter, Lawful
Best abilities: Constitution (16), Wisdom (14)
Worst ability: Dexterity (7)
Wow, you hit the nail on the head, very succinctly. Start with the original, then add your preferences. It never made sense to me for folks to *start out* with some rando dude's interpretation of the original game, instead of playing the actual original and then personally considering any potential tweaking. I said something similar when I stumbled across a discussion with one of those rewriter-publishers where he said the goal was to teach people to play the actual original game, but then talked about all the changes and his personal preferences that were going into the "product." I posted that gee, shouldn't he adhere to the actual original game, maybe re-organizing and with a bit more explanation? And stop right there? The conversation ended right there, the "insiders" took it private. So it goes...
ReplyDelete