Post by geneweigel on Aug 3, 2016 12:33:28 GMT -5
There was a thread starting of what is wrong with the Mentzer line compared to the Moldvay line which is a repeated thread over and over but no one every delves into the Expert VS. Expert.
I recall when 1981 Expert came out that it was kind of incoherent seeming like a slack picker upper for the foibles of the 1981 Basic Set to meet AD&D rather than anything evocative. The Lands of the Expert never inspired me to do anything except perhaps to ignore (I failed to buy the entire GAZETTEER series set in the "Known World" after perusing the first one GAZ1 GRAND DUCHY OF KARAMEIKOS (1987) and disliking the overdecorated and bland style of it.).
The 1983 Mentzer Expert while evocative in parts seems rubberized like the 1983 Mentzer Basic which would continue with others in the series (Companion, Master, Immortals, etc.).
The 1981 Expert is brass tacks everywhere and the 1983 Mentzer edit adds florid weirdness to talk to the kids. A good example is the horse paragraph in the Mentzer edit under PLAYER INFORMATION:
There is nothing but straight up D&D reference in the 1981 Expert this 1983 text just seems to be over emphasizing the obvious if you're going to play the game.
I recall when 1981 Expert came out that it was kind of incoherent seeming like a slack picker upper for the foibles of the 1981 Basic Set to meet AD&D rather than anything evocative. The Lands of the Expert never inspired me to do anything except perhaps to ignore (I failed to buy the entire GAZETTEER series set in the "Known World" after perusing the first one GAZ1 GRAND DUCHY OF KARAMEIKOS (1987) and disliking the overdecorated and bland style of it.).
The 1983 Mentzer Expert while evocative in parts seems rubberized like the 1983 Mentzer Basic which would continue with others in the series (Companion, Master, Immortals, etc.).
The 1981 Expert is brass tacks everywhere and the 1983 Mentzer edit adds florid weirdness to talk to the kids. A good example is the horse paragraph in the Mentzer edit under PLAYER INFORMATION:
As the Campaign develops, characters will
travel many miles in search of adventure.
Most characters will probably purchase
one or more horses to make travel faster
and easier. Riding horses are the fastest
normal steeds, but are no help in combat,
and do not wear barding (horse armor).
War horses are larger and tougher, and
may be useful in wilderness encounters. A
war horse can fight, using its two front
hoof attacks (for 1-6 points each), with the
help of the character riding it. While guiding
the horse, the character may not attack
or cast a spell, but may perform some
other action (such as drinking a potion,
changing weapons, etc.). When not ridden,
a war horse will defend itself without needing
such guidance. Any character class can
ride a war horse.
travel many miles in search of adventure.
Most characters will probably purchase
one or more horses to make travel faster
and easier. Riding horses are the fastest
normal steeds, but are no help in combat,
and do not wear barding (horse armor).
War horses are larger and tougher, and
may be useful in wilderness encounters. A
war horse can fight, using its two front
hoof attacks (for 1-6 points each), with the
help of the character riding it. While guiding
the horse, the character may not attack
or cast a spell, but may perform some
other action (such as drinking a potion,
changing weapons, etc.). When not ridden,
a war horse will defend itself without needing
such guidance. Any character class can
ride a war horse.
There is nothing but straight up D&D reference in the 1981 Expert this 1983 text just seems to be over emphasizing the obvious if you're going to play the game.