2nd to 1st Edition Conversions

maasenstodt · Unread post by **maasenstodt** » Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:48 pm

There have been a fair number of 1st to 2nd edition PFRPG conversion threads, but I'm curious if any of you have gone the other direction. I've always been of the opinion that 1st ed. is a superior game, but the most recent Palladium campaign that I've played in was run using 2nd ed. After a hiatus, it looks like the campaign will be starting up again soon, and the topic of switching to 1st ed. has been broached.

I'm very interested in hearing about any experiences that you have with this matter, particularly with regards to the mechanics. Of course, I'd welcome any thoughts that you might have.

Entiago · Unread post by **Entiago** » Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:00 pm

never went the other way, never will either. but thats just me...

suggestions for doing so? sure take away the SDC (1st ed had no SDC), I would keep the PPE and casting magic rules of the 2nd edition, (the 1st ed rules on casting magic seem a bit D&Dish to me) and try those nifty PPE Channeling rules by Jason Richards in Rifter #21.

maasenstodt · Unread post by **maasenstodt** » Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:11 pm

Entiago wrote:suggestions for doing so? sure take away the SDC (1st ed had no SDC), I would keep the PPE and casting magic rules of the 2nd edition, (the 1st ed rules on casting magic seem a bit D&Dish to me) and try those nifty PPE Channeling rules by Jason Richards in Rifter #21.

I appreciate your reply.

Getting rid of SDC is a given - the question of to how to do so for races and classes that have been built around the presense of SDC is quite open to debate.

As for magic, we wouldn't be keeping PPE around (it seems a bit video gamish to me

). While Jason's rules are certainly an improvement on Palladium's stock rules, I still find the 1st ed. version to be superior.

That said, I'd welcome any other thoughts you have.

Entiago · Unread post by **Entiago** » Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:24 pm

eh, I just hate the spells cast per day rules.

for the races that have been built around SDC (even some OCCs) add bonuses to strike, dodge, parry, init.......wait come to think of it just add a little more into their HPs... 1 HP point for every 5 or 10 SDC they are supposed to recieve.

other that the SDC and PPE issues, I don't think there is anything different from 2nd to 1st editions.

J. Lionheart · Unread post by **J. Lionheart** » Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:46 pm

Going back to 1e from 2e is the same process as going 1e to 2e, just in reverse. You do all the same adjustments:

SDC
PPE
Skills
Hand to Hand
etc etc etc

As with 1e to 2e, the biggest changes going back are going to be a priests or light/dark, and druids (the 2e druid does not exist in 1e. The 1e druid becomes the "totem druid" in 2e).

The players will have to get used to weaker characters, but if they've played 1e before, it shouldn't be a problem. Without physical skills, 1e characters are also far less likely to have big attribute bonuses, and things like armor are going to be very useful again.

As for OCCs and races built around SDC ideas, look to see if they existed in 1e, quite a few did. If they didn't, however, Entiago's suggestion is probably the way to go, or you could use a low to mid-level natural AR to compensate for a lost SDC bonus.

Nekira Sudacne · Sun Feb 13, 2005 3:57 am

spells per day is vidio gamish too.

me? I use PPE and all non-ritual spell magic takes one melee action to preform.

maasenstodt · Unread post by **maasenstodt** » Sun Feb 13, 2005 4:29 am

Nekira Sudacne wrote:spells per day is vidio gamish too.

I disagree. Perhaps it simply speaks to my video game experiences, but having played many such games on the NES, Genesis, SNES, & Dreamcast, the overwhelming majority have some form of spell point system. The only one that I can think of that I've played and might have been an exception is Wizardry (though that was so long ago, I'm not certain).

Given what I've seen, spells per day or memorization styles of magic are at most significantly under-represented in video games. On the other hand, asides from RPGs, the only place I've seen spell points discussed is in video games.

To me, having played RPGs since the Moldvay boxed set and 1st ed. AD&D days, spells per day just feels right. It's less mathematical than spell points, more arcane. It's easier to keep track of, and at least in my experience, it adds drama and flavor.

Spell points are OK when they're being kept track of by a computer and the focus is less upon actual roleplaying than hack. But I don't have the resources or desire to play such video games very often anymore. I prefer to spend my time with friends around a table, as I'm sure many of us do. In that environment, I prefer to limit the number of video gamish elements that we must deal with because that makes for a more enjoyable experience.

Sentinel · Unread post by **Sentinel** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:43 pm

I feel that limiting the spells to set number of times per day unfairly hinders mages. PPE gives them more of a fighting chance to keep pace with the other characters in the game, and to be useful and capable where no other character could be.
I personally prefer the SDC all around.

Janus · Unread post by **Janus** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:26 pm

Nekira Sudacne wrote:spells per day is vidio gamish too.

me? I use PPE and all non-ritual spell magic takes one melee action to preform.

Not all video games are like that or even per day, the only illusion there is that the characters had to rest in an inn to get their spells back. Now the great Lunar Series of games used mana points to cast their magic with.

BTW how does that system you use work? I was thinking along those terms myself, but was worried it may be a bit overpowered for the higher spells.

maasenstodt · Unread post by **maasenstodt** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:19 pm

Sentinel wrote:I feel that limiting the spells to set number of times per day unfairly hinders mages. PPE gives them more of a fighting chance to keep pace with the other characters in the game, and to be useful and capable where no other character could be.
I personally prefer the SDC all around.

Spells per day does limit the number of lightweight spells that a mage can cast, but it also allows more common use of the heavyweight spells that might cost too much PPE to use frequently in 2nd ed. In the end, I think it works out well.

As for SDC, it just prolongs combat by making everyone capable of withstanding multiple attacks while adding another stat to keep track of. Heck, a better solution to get the same result would have been to reduce weapon damage, since at least there would be fewer numbers to juggle.

J. Lionheart · Unread post by **J. Lionheart** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 1:09 am

maasenstodt wrote:Spells per day does limit the number of lightweight spells that a mage can cast, but it also allows more common use of the heavyweight spells that might cost too much PPE to use frequently in 2nd ed. In the end, I think it works out well.

Aye, exactly. You may only be able to cast 10 Globes of Daylight in a day, but you could also cast 10 Call Lightnings, or 10 Havoc's, or whatever. It balances out a bit. Entirely a matter of personal preference.

Sentinel · Unread post by **Sentinel** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:55 am

As for SDC, it just prolongs combat by making everyone capable of withstanding multiple attacks while adding another stat to keep track of. Heck, a better solution to get the same result would have been to reduce weapon damage, since at least there would be fewer numbers to juggle.

SDC gives the characters the ability to go through epic adventures and combats ala LOtR, without dying too fast. Strider/Aragorn couldn't have made it through all three films without SDC.
I also just prefer to keep the SDC consistent to all the games: One Megaverse, One set of Rules.