How We Experienced the Game

One thing that has amazed me from the discussions on various Internet message forums about older Dungeons & Dragons (AD&D1, especially) is how two people can have such totally different experiences with the game even though they both played extensively and with numerous groups.

For instance, no group I ever played with (long enough to gain a level) ever used the training rules in AD&D1 campaigns. I never enforced the training rules, no DM I ever played under enforced the training rules, and no Player in any of my campaigns ever mentioned them.

Also, the concept of declaring actions before rolling initiative, as stated in the DMG, was completely unknown to me until this year — after 27 years of gaming. I played AD&D1 for about 15 years, with a few dozen people, and never, ever, not once, did anyone ever so much as mention that rule. And I’m not just counting groups I played with long enough to gain a level. Even the groups that I played with only one time didn’t mention or use this rule.

But I’ve met people on discussion forums who always used the training rules and declare actions rule, in every group they played with. They never knew anyone who didn’t use them.

There are some people who never saw the xp for gp rule ever used, and there are some people who always saw it used. This is a rule that can seriously alter the game experience in a major way, so someone who never saw the rule used will have a completely different memory of the game than someone who always saw the rule used.

And then there’s the difference of experience with regard to magic item availability, power levels, etc.

Yes, a lot (all?) of this stuff comes from how the individual groups and DMs ruled, house ruled, and styled their games. But how did one person encounter only DMs of a particular style, and another encounter only DMs of a completely opposite style? I know AD&D1 was often heavily house ruled, and there are some book rules that were almost universally house ruled by most groups. But how is it Player A’s experience is that everyone always used the training rules, but Player B’s experience is that no one ever used the training rules (to use just one rule as an example)?

These pervasive, diametrically different experiences just amaze me. How does it happen? Whenever someone talks about “old school gaming” different people often give contradictory descriptions:

“It was about kicking in the door, attacking the monster with wild abandon, and thoroughly looting the premises.”

“It was about approaching every door with caution, using intelligent tactics against monsters (running when the monster was too tough), and knowing what treasure to leave alone.”

Some people say that “in the old days” magic items were rare and wondrous. Others say that “in the old days” magic items were loaded in dungeons by the metric ton.

Some folks say that a DM’s word was inarguable and always accepted by Players back in the day. And others say that there was plenty of bickering, whining, and arguing back in the day.

These can’t both be true, can they?

AD&D1 had many, many styles — just look at the varied official TSR adventure modules. Compare Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh to The Village of Hommlet, or the Dragonlance series to the Elemental Evil series — each a very different style than the other. But how could a player go through 10+ years of AD&D1 only experiencing one style of the game, even after relocating, going to college, etc.?

Bullgrit
bullgrit@totalbullgrit.com