One more option please, All of the above.
One more option please, All of the above.The question isn't what your preferred edition is. Your generation is defined by what version of D&D you started playing FIRST.Traditionally this would have been one of the versions of D&D in print at the time you started playing. Until very recently it was not common for people to begin playing out-of-print editions. For example, even though these days I mostly play OD&D, I am firmly 2nd generation because I started out with the Moldvay Basic Set in 1981.
The big bump in the 2nd category suggests you might do well to sub-categorize Holmes Basic, Moldvay/Cook, and AD&D; apart from being good data massaging I think it's theoretically justified (I went from Holmes to AD&D and find myself often surprised by how different the experience of people who stuck with Moldvay was).- Tavis
v2.5 = Pathfinder Liteno feats, no psionics, no XP, no prestige classes classic feel but compatible with d20*I thought of it first (2005),or did castles and crusades ; - )but the big guys had distribution*(the latter has the most FREE source material)
The big bump in the 2nd category suggests you might do well to sub-categorize Holmes Basic, Moldvay/Cook, and AD&DI respectfully disagree. I think this bump represents (1) this was when D&D was at the height of its popularity and sold by far the most copies, and (2) people that read this blog tend to be old school gamers of this generation.Further, I'd wager all Holmes and most Moldvay/Cook players quickly began using AD&D anyway. Holmes was marketed as an intro set for AD&D, so I don't think it warrants being its own separate generation. Moldvay/Cook was the official basic line for only two years, so it doesn't make sense to make it an entire separate generation.I think a lot of us from this period played a kind of a mash-up of two or three of these games - I played B/X with a little AD&D mixed in, myself.
2nd generation here! Started with Moldvay and went to AD&D fairly quickly. Played many different games in the 90s before settling on Gurps for a long run in the 90s. Came back to D&D with 3e.
I think you're right about a lot of people playing B/X with AD&D added. I realized that recently after getting my old books back, and realizing that LL AEC is essentially replicating our style of B/X + PHB (not so much DMG). I've read similar things in posts and comments all over the place.
I myself started with my "purple" box set, and within a year or two moved up to AD&D. This was primarily because I thought that AD&D and B/X were related; one "graduated" up to AD&D when one was ready for the complexity. Obviously, I was not a child genius.I remember trying to convert one of my Dwarf characters from B/X to AD&D, and being quite befuddled by the whole thing.If only early teen-Me had known that I would continue to be a nerd into my 40s - I'd have kept all of that old Gamma World, Traveller, Star Frontiers, Gangbusters, etc. crap that used to cover my room's floor.I love the LBB, and I was very pleased to be able to pick up a box and the four supplements, but I truly marvel that back then, I had no idea that B/X wasn't the original Dungeons and Dragons. I don't even remember knowing anyone who had anything other than B/X, AD&D, and the plethora of %-based games TSR rolled out in the early '80s (other than Traveller).
I'm first gen by date (1977), but I started with Holmes (2nd gen in the poll). I voted first since '77's when I began to play :DAllan.
Alright, who are the three people who voted in the Founder category?
Definitely fifth. I'm a youngster, even if I play old games now.
Alright, who are the three people who voted in the Founder category?Gygax, Arnesan, and ? (They are polling from beyond the grave!)
I voted fifth, but reading the comments now you might count me as fourth. Technically I started with AD&D 2E for several months, but that experience drove me away from D&D to Rolemaster and some others. 3.0 got me back into D&D, and in a lasting way for the first time. Old school play is a recent addition for me.Word verification: cranistr. Make it crainiuster and you have an exploding, psionically attacking brain in a jar.
I think this bump represents (1) this was when D&D was at the height of its popularity and sold by far the most copies, and (2) people that read this blog tend to be old school gamers of this generation.Those are worthy hypotheses which the sub-categorization of Holmes/Moldvay/AD&D would not have tested as well! I agree that what I'm talking about is better done as a sub-analysis. (Other people who belong to other categories may also see within-group distinctions worth making).Further, I'd wager all Holmes and most Moldvay/Cook players quickly began using AD&D anyway.That certainly describes me, but I'd be interested to see the data. When I've met people at the Arneson Gamedays & elsewhere who didn't make that move to AD&D, their experience seems to have been much more "Arnesonian" - they did wilderness exploration, built strongholds, established baronies, etc. and largely eschewed the tendency towards epic narrative that crept into my own gaming well in advance of Dragonlance, which I think is thanks to the relative clarity of the support for procedural sandbox play in B/E and B/E/C/M/I. Lumping these Basic lineages in with AD&D 1E and 2E respectively prevents an examination of how common it was to meld them or keep them distinct.- Tavis
I'm generation 1.75 we started with Holmes Edited Basic and added the original supplements until we moved to AD&D.
"The question isn't what your preferred edition is. Your generation is defined by what version of D&D you started playing FIRST................." Oh, I knew what the question was, I was provided an example of what happens when one doesn't read the question fully. :D
Hmm surprised to see my fellow 4th-gen guys representing such a large chunk. I would have figured we were much smaller than that.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.