Question About the Complete Handbook Content

[ChrisRevocateur]

Do the Complete Handbooks that had the 1st edition versions of their respective classes in the back (Bard, Druid, Paladin, and Ranger) include those classes as useable?

[celestian]

Do the Complete Handbooks that had the 1st edition versions of their respective classes in the back (Bard, Druid, Paladin, and Ranger) include those classes as useable?

Yes.

[damned]

Yes.

This man does not do things by half!

[ChrisRevocateur]

That's AWESOME! So I get those four Completes (I already have the three core books), then add in the 1st Edition extension, and the extra OSRIC classes, and I essentially have a "full" 1st edition rules set. Thanks!

[celestian]

That's AWESOME! So I get those four Completes (I already have the three core books), then add in the 1st Edition extension, and the extra OSRIC classes, and I essentially have a "full" 1st edition rules set. Thanks!

I don't know about "full" but functional. There is very little difference in some of the classes to be fair. You can also make others (like the ones in the UA) with a little exploration of the existing classes.

[ChrisRevocateur]

Thus the quotation marks. As a grognard that started with 1st (it was the only PHB we had) and quickly moved on to 2nd back in 1997, I totally understand that there are some fairly significant differences. But most of those differences aren't in a way that would matter too much in the way the rules set is automated. Thac0 progression is close enough to the combat matricies that it doesn't really need to be worried about (yeah, there's some irregularity, and the fighter will get a point drop every level instead of two point drops every other level, but close enough), and the proficiency system is almost identical. I think the biggest departures will be the more complicated initiative/round rules, the more complicated weapon vs AC rules, and the difference in the numbers on the saving throw table. The initiative thing isn't something automated at this point (considering AD&D 2E didn't really use segments or anything) and so doesn't matter, the weapon vs. AC table is something that would be GOOD to have automated, but the 2nd edition of the rule works well enough, and the saving throw numbers can just be edited directly.

It HAS been over 20 years since I played 1E though, so I'm probably misremembering something.

[celestian]

Thus the quotation marks. As a grognard that started with 1st (it was the only PHB we had) and quickly moved on to 2nd back in 1997, I totally understand that there are some fairly significant differences. But most of those differences aren't in a way that would matter too much in the way the rules set is automated. Thac0 progression is close enough to the combat matricies that it doesn't really need to be worried about (yeah, there's some irregularity, and the fighter will get a point drop every level instead of two point drops every other level, but close enough), and the proficiency system is almost identical. I think the biggest departures will be the more complicated initiative/round rules, the more complicated weapon vs AC rules, and the difference in the numbers on the saving throw table. The initiative thing isn't something automated at this point (considering AD&D 2E didn't really use segments or anything) and so doesn't matter, the weapon vs. AC table is something that would be GOOD to have automated, but the 2nd edition of the rule works well enough, and the saving throw numbers can just be edited directly.

It HAS been over 20 years since I played 1E though, so I'm probably misremembering something.

2E does have the "optional" weapon v Armor and in the ruleset you can use the "Modifiers" feature to support it if you like.