Видео

Ok I have never heard of this before… it looks freaking awesome…!

I don't really see what's controversial? Apply some thesaurus logic and moving silently is to move stealthily. It's a game of roles, so the idea of it being unique (yet different because magic) wasn't really an issue from when I played. It fills an important role in a group, it leaves the wizard and priest to do other things.

I have no intention of buying anything from Wotc but this was a great video on the founding editions

It looks like they’ve taken huge inspiration from OSR books which the newer layout and backgrounds

My favorite players handbook for D&D is the Mentzer Basic PHB. Short, sweet, to the point.

First lemme say I love all your videos. I listen to them a lot while driving. Keep doing them! I didn’t play much of AD&D/Wizard’s D&D (BECMI is what I played most of the time), but I am a fan of the AD&D 2nd ed. core hardcovers, in the original printing you show, for the art, the clean layout and the clear approach to the rules.

Fantastic video, and probably my favorite D&D channel on youtube. I've been playing for 35 years, started in 2nd grade. I didn't pay much attention to the happenings of D&D in a more meta concept back then, with respect to TSR / business decisions / Gary as a person, etc. It's so refreshing to hear your retellings of the history of the game, without defaulting to the current year spin of 'omg Gary was such a terrible human being.'

I can honestly say this was awesome. I also STILL bust open my 1st edition stuff. I have been playing since 1979 and still play 3.0-3.5 edition today. 45 years of DnD.....

Heh. Back in the day... Had to spec type by hand. I'm SO glad for DTP and PageMaker!

As a DM I actually disliked WMs Just extra paper work and stats to keep track of The Players and I have a narrative to tell and WMs just slow things down

I really enjoyed the move from 1E to 2E, we played the Time of Troubles modules and it was a lot of fun. It's stuck with me a lot better than 1E has as well. I still run it. While I like most kits, I do think that there's room for more classes. Barbarians were more unique in 1E than what kits present, same with cavaliers. although the cavalier kit does gain more than barbarian kits do, in keeping with their 1e design. Subclasses offer something unique that isn't covered by proficiencies.

I loved this video. I really enjoyed seeing your old characters and hearing you talk about your previous adventures. Hope to hear more like these soon. Cheers 🎉

18:35 I remember that in my college's ttrpg club, there was one guy who ran open DND oneshots every meeting week and I think the lowest player count he ever got was around 5-6 for weeks right before some break while the highest was always at the start of a semester and there was one game with 19 players at once which was a mess but as terrible as it sounds because the guy was a good GM overall.

Piparskeggr from X here: Very good overview and filling in history blanks for me. I would get White Dwarf at my local back when. I have 9 of the AD&D 1E hardcovers, including FF. The Githyanki is the only one I remember using in the games I ran.

I started with 4.5, played 5e from 2014-22, and then switched to osr systems. I've been reflecting on what I want out of a role-playing game, and how closely different editions achieve that. What I've concluded is that in TSR editions, the rules are primarily for the DM. In WotC editions, the rules are primarily for the player. Not 100% in either case, but as you said, you can play in a B/X campaign while barely using the rules, but the idea a 3e player could do that is laughable. And for my money, that makes the TSR editions better for roleplaying. Role playing is when you make decisions as if you were the character, and the fewer conceptual barriers there are between you and the character, the more closely you can make decisions in their place. The more you think about the rules of the game, the less you are really embodying the character.

The covers show the progression of how D&D has transformed from fantasy to "super" fantasy. I'll take AD&D. : )

Another great Video! I mostly use the 2nd Edition Revised Jeff Easley cover PHB and the 1st edition, Jeff Easley cover DMG

Thank you for this and all your wonderful, deep dive videos.

MP3/Podcast these somewhere!

For my money I do think the 3.5 phb has the most inspiration for a player to make a new character. The others are mostly clinical (other than 1e). I'd like to see a break down of how rules for exploration and dungeon crawling have changed in the various editions. The procedures in B/X and BECMI are so smart, and I can't remember any of the other books having anything even close to that for actual rules for exploration.

I got a fairly good copy of this book online a few years ago to complete my hard book collection of 1e books. This one is one of my favorites. Great book. I actually am playing a tinkerer gnome in an online game.

The 1e phb absolutely doesn't tell you how to generate ability scores. In fact it explicitly tells you to ask your dm. It neither tells you how to create a fighter or how to hit an orc with one.

Interesting. I have to say that the convention DM , and the Storm Crusher sound inept and/or inexperienced. I do think there is a great lesson in your Warhammer style campaign. I , like you , would have been inclined to not let the player slide across the campaign lines and be an arcane caster , but clearly it led to a wonderfully unpredictable character progression. Well done. Good food for DM thought.

Thanks

Thanks for the excellent video. The Bell 'barbarian' drawing was a swipe from a Marvel comic (N Fury I think).

Thanks!

To this day I still love Vince Guaraldi's Linus and Lucy.

Ah yes, the character creation CD that came with 3.0. I think I still have mine. I remember it was very limited and not supported. I was teed off that I couldn't do prestige classes with it. But in the 3.5 era a group of Excel savants created HeroForge and put it out for free. It and a companion spreadsheet SpellForge were constantly updated as new books came out. It stopped being updated about the time WotC moved to 4th edition.

It is interesting to see how the approaches changed over time. My first group mixed and matched original, basic, and AD&D to fit our own interests. Short of the competition space, I have never understood the rules lawyering. My wife loves Vince Guaraldi, so I ordered that album for her birthday.

Another awesome video! I think you should get the 2024 PHB just to complete the collection, not so much to do a video. Two thousend youtubers and their cat are doing that already. But if money is tight, then pass.

Ad&d phb was my first one .

@Daddy Rolled a 1, The Dice and Dragons T-shirt is cool. Shame you don't have it in larger unisex sizes.

I started with the Moldvay edition but didn't own it; it belonged to a friend with whom I was playing the game. The first D&D products I owned were the three core (1E) AD&D rulebooks. My friends and I soon switched to that version. I still have my PHB, DMG and MM from back then and all of the rest of my AD&D rulebooks and supplements.

Great channel. Very cool.

fictional rape OMG not fictional rape!

race>species.

wtf is that intro; cringe.

1:01:52: okay that is VERY weird because one of the earliest gygax letter says specifically that the "fire and forget" magic was a later change because their play system didn't fit into their number of pages... said older system he describes as using MP, although I'm not familiar enough with warlock to know if there were big differences edit: you talk about it later, I didn't know the context for those then, crazy he REALLY didn't want to say their name directly lol

Good stuff.

Thanks Martin! Bought The Making of Original D&D. Great facsimiles for everything just before and after the brown box. Favorite edition is 2nd; my grandmother bought me all the core books for my birthday.

Get the PDF of the new edition PHB. That way you can at least look through it, but aren’t deeply invested.

I was peering around youtube to see who is talking about the new book. An FYI, Star Probe, Star Empire, and Star Master (the RPG). As a campaign it was being played roughly around 1973. David Megarry, The Author of Dungeon! board game was the Editor for a proposed publication of Part 3 of the series at Adventure Games. Pieces of the manuscript have been found. John Snider is consulting to help complete the game with David Megarry again as editor. We expect to do some kind of event around it at Arnecon game convention. Either a play session, or a seminar and over view. We may need play testers for it. If this interests you let me know. We also have complete drafts of Richard Snider's game Mutant, which was also rejected by TSR around 1974. That too is planned for publication.

Hasbro D&D isn't for me. Nor will I support the financially. I have better games systems I can use.

The example of play for 1e is in the DMG with the spider next to the map.

DnD "Finally" Removes Race And Becomes Diverse! By Making Everyone The Same.. ruclips.net/video/8dsWiG0In-w/видео.html

28:30 Because wands are supposed to be aimed at the target like a ray gun, wand didn't casts spells per se. That's why in Rules Cyclopedia, as an optional rule, a character can add their Dex bonus to Saving Throw versus wands. Wands were basically guns of D&D, and wand users were basically gunslingers. Offensive wands have effects based on energy, like cold or lighting. It was about speed, agility and ducking behind cover (imagine fight scene in Ministry of Magic from HP Order of Phoenix movie). Staves, from the other hand, were not aimed at target (narratively you can imagine a spellcaster holding staff above their head when using it), and often affected areas or groups rather the individuals (like Staff of Command). Offensive staffs applied usually mind altering effects so it was about willpower, not agility. One can not "dodge" a charm, like they could ray of frost. I like how Gavin Norman renamed "Wands" to "Rays" in his Dolmenwood variant of B/X. It's way easier to grasp an idea that way.

I'm certainly not looking forward to the future of having to refer to D&D 'editions'/updates/versions/whatever. It's going to be like The Thing. Oh you mean the remake? No, the other remake. D&D? You mean the 1977 one or the 2024 one? Yes, the 2024 version but particularly the version that got D&DBeyond patched in 2025. Which one, the February one or the December one? Oh, you're talking about D&D One 5.2.108!

Thanks for the video! The PH(B) is always the best known book of its respective edition. "(. . .) because he didn't think the players should know ahead of time what number they needed to roll. I don't know why but he just didn't." It's my understanding that Gary was always modifying the percentage chance of a player character managing to do whatever it was the player was declaring. So in his mind, he was picturing a vast array of subtables with every nuanced description. He was constantly calculating the odds and they were always situationally unique, which is why the table (and all the rules) were simply guidelines. This is why I previously suggested the DMG and Survival guides were the perfect compliment of books to read, absorb, then ignore at the table, because once the original ideas for how to adjudicate any given situation is in your head, they are only as useful situationally as guidelines for the unique circumstances a DM is facing with his particular group on any particular day. The DM at the table needs to decide how much to tweak a die roll if earlier in an adventure Biff the Cleric lost a backpack strap but is now being helped to climb a rough cliff face up twenty feet to a cavern landing where a tunnel leads to a chamber of goblins who may or may not being slyly scooching small stones off the ledge above to make the climb more difficult though Timmy the Thief and Dirk the Fighter are helping Biff find handholds. No table or rule can be pre-written or pre-constructed to account for all of that because no game rule designer can know the minds of RPGers until they describe their intended action(s). The rules are only guidelines because they are merely DM prep work. This is further complicated because the players, through their PCs, don't have all the information and telling them the number they need to roll can often give them information they should not have, like the hidden goblins above making the climb, and thus the roll, more difficult. A player might know what they needed to roll in a previous situation which was similar but sans goblins.

1e to hit tables always made me sad - for the relatively short time I played it. 2e THAC0 is basically the same but felt more unified, because it was just the one number and mental math. Also no more weapon speed factor. Also I don’t think we ever really used non weapon proficiencies across the 10 years off and on we played it.

presumably @1:04:22 you are thinking of page 105 of the 1e PHB "example of combat"