Why 1st Edition D&D Sucks

Oct 5, 2026

Why 1st Edition D&D Sucks examines recurring complaints about rule changes across editions, then provides historical context for the evolution from Chainmail and OD&D through Basic, Advanced, and the appearance of the 1e Player’s Handbook. It argues that later improvements address design flaws while still inviting debate about what “feels” like D&D. The work then frames specific rule problems, starting with meaningless ability-score ranges, explaining how combat effectiveness, carrying limits, and save-related outcomes blur into sameness.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryLiterature

FormatPDF

Pages30

Reading Time46 min

AccessFree to download

Table of Contents

Character Creation

Character Advancement

Races

Classes In General

Specific Classes

Equipment

Combat

Monsters

Spellcasting

General

Book Design & Layout

Miscellaneous

Bits and Pieces

Summary

Why 1st Edition D&D Sucks Every time a new edition comes out, lots of people complain about how bad the new rules are.“It doesn’t feel like D&D anymore” is a common one.“They’re trying to make it like [insert current popular computer game here]” is another. Trust me—you’re not the first person to say that. For that matter,“First edition” D&D wasn’t the first rules set of the game. It was at least the third and arguably the fourth. Chainmail was published in 1971. It was essentially a miniatures game, but it had a 12-page “Fantasy Supplement” and the central elements of what was to become D&D. You could play an ongoing campaign (and people did) that was substantially similar to how people played once the official D&D name was tacked on. The woodgrain box set (now called OD&D, for Original) came out in January of 1974. This version went through six or more printings before the Monster Manual came out in 1977. Given how many printings it went through, and the nature of RPGs, in which not everybody atthe table owns a rulebook, tens of thousands of gamers were already using this version when the hardbacks started hitting the shelves. The OD&D Supplements (Greyhawk, Blackmoor, Eldritch Wizardy, Swords and Spells, and Gods, Demigods and Heroes) were released between 1975 and 1978. They substantially modified the box set rules. They added the paladin, thief, monk, druid, and assassin classes. They added psionics rules and other rules that were later left out (hit locations, for example) . The Basic set came out in early 1977 (the first printing of the MM was in December) . Although the Basic and Advanced versions of the game went in different directions, which means that this release is not exactly on a linear path to First Edition, you could argue that this counts as an edition. In any case, a Monster Manual is not a rules set. The 1e Players Handbook didn't hit the shelves until June 1978, which means this edition predates “first edition”. Given this history,“First Edition” had the same issues with its previous players as 2nd edition, 3rd and 4th all had with players who started before those revisions took place. People thought that printing hardback books was a specious money-grab. Digest-sized books with bad art were as high-end as the game needed. Insert tired, invalid arguments here. Apparently, whatever version some people start with is the best ever. Don’t think that changes are always improvements? I agree. They’re not always better. However, a great many of them are. Earlier versions of the game had characters rerolling their hit points for each game session. Go back to using regular dice instead of polyhedrals. I dare you. Initiative was determined solely by your Dexterity score. If you want to be a purist, go back to that nonsense. First edition had its flaws, too. While you might not like all of the changes in the game since then, a look back at some of the rules might reveal exactly how superior later versions came to be. Taken as a whole, I think the game has improved. In this work, I'm going to point out some flaws, describe why they matter and suggest a fix. My goal is to retain as much 1e flavor as I can, which means that some level of brokenness can't be fixed, only jury-rigged into a workable system. As always, I look for in-game precedents first, then other existing solutions (in other games or other versions), and then create a new method if all else fails. Table of Contents Character Creation..................................................................................................................3 Character Advancement..........................................................................................................5 Races.......................................................................................................................................8 Classes In General.............................................................................................

FAQs

Why do people criticize newer D&D editions?

People often complain that new rules don’t feel like D&D anymore and that changes resemble popular modern computer games. Others accuse the designers of trying to force similar mechanics into the tabletop experience.

How did earlier D&D-related rule sets influence the eventual first edition?

Chainmail (1971) and OD&D/Original (1974) contributed core elements and supported campaign-style play. Later OD&D supplements expanded options and classes, and Basic/Advanced releases appeared before the 1e Player’s Handbook.

What is the first major flaw discussed in the document?

The first issue is “Meaningless ability scores,” where an 8-point range of ability scores is described as largely identical in combat effectiveness. The document explains how different scores still produce different secondary benefits, but combat differences are often too small to matter.

Oct 5, 2026

Upload by Sophia Brooks