Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
A New Taxonomy for TSR-Era D&D
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8346915" data-attributes="member: 7023840"><p>The issue at hand is so <em>basic </em>(ahem) it's not even worth making a separate long thread. And I do those at the drop of a hat. As I wrote in the OP-</p><p></p><p><strong>Holmes </strong>(1977) Strangely, Holmes Basic is NOT "Basic" D&D like Moldvay and Mentzer, but is OD&D. Specifically, it was supposed to be a codification, for beginners (a "basic" ruleset) of the OD&D rules, and ended up having a tacked-on introduction to 1e.</p><p></p><p>None of this is, or should be, in dispute. This is what Holmes was tasked with (re-doing OD&D into a basic set) and the published version explicitly references the upcoming AD&D. It was akin to what we would now call a "starter set."</p><p></p><p>Moreover, the version of OD&D that was being played when Holmes and the MM/PHB were released was pretty <u>advanced</u>; those advances were codified in many ways in the PHB. The core PHB AD&D classes were ... OD&D classes.</p><p>Assassin? Blackmoor supplement.</p><p>Bard? Strategic Review v. 2 #1.</p><p>Cleric? Men & Magic.</p><p>Druid? Eldritch Wizardry.</p><p>Illusionist? Strategic Review v. 1 #4.</p><p>Fighter? Chainmail, Men & Magic.</p><p>Magic User? Chainmail, Men & Magic.</p><p>Monk? Blackmoor.</p><p>Paladin? Greyhawk.</p><p>Ranger? Strategic Review, v. 1 #2.</p><p>Thief? Great Plains Newsletter #9, Greyhawk.</p><p></p><p>Everything, from race-is-not-class, to the artifacts and relics, to the psionics- that was all OD&D. AD&D is (re-written, advanced, codified) OD&D. It's not that hard. And since Holmes is OD&D (that is what he was supposed to write), it's all part of the same lineage.</p><p></p><p>Which brings up the question- what is the Moldvay line? How is it that it resembles D&D so closely? Well, um ... BECAUSE IT'S D&D???? I mean, it's pretty hard to get more ... basic ... than that!</p><p></p><p>Of course, underlying all of this is the lawsuit between Arneson and TSR. This timeline is confirmed by just looking at the dates.</p><p></p><p>In 1980, Gygax confirmed in Dragon that there would be an upcoming expansion of the Holmes' basic rules into expert rules. At the same time, B2 began to be packaged with the Holmes set (notably, B2 was written with OD&D rules- not B/X).</p><p></p><p>At some time between that notification and 1981, the story changed, and Moldvay wrote the "new" basic set. Importantly, and this is for background- the whole concept behind "basic sets" was explicated; that they were to introduce players to playing D&D (AD&D). So, if this was the case, then why did Moldvay/Cook (and later Mentzer with BECMI) have a completely separate route than the earlier OD&D/AD&D line?</p><p></p><p><em>EDIT- just checked and confirmed; the settlement was in March 1981. Given the amount of time these negotiations would take to finalize, and the amount of time between the initial filing and the settlement, the timeline fits that the switch from the original plan of just having an expansion to Holmes to having Moldvay rush out a new Basic set in 1981 that credited both Gygax and Arneson was part of the settlement negotiations. </em></p><p></p><p>Well, the settlement regarding royalties arguably played <u>the </u>major part. It is generally accepted that Arneson received 2.5% of the AD&D royalties (from 5% of the OD&D royalties), but TSR was required to keep a separate version in print with the original royalties; hence, the sudden need for a forked version. Therefore, the basic line.</p><p></p><p>Which is why you end up with the confusion; AD&D is the OD&D line, as the additional supplements and articles during the 70s shows. It's pretty simple. The Moldvay/Cook line developed into a separate system (BECMI, RC) because the entire purpose was to look back to the LBBs (the Arneson originals), simplify them (race as class, etc.), and from that starting point ... the game eventually branched off even further.</p><p></p><p>(Final side note- [USER=7015759]@Rob Kuntz[/USER] once remarked here that Arneson made much more from his royalties than did Gygax, so there's that)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8346915, member: 7023840"] The issue at hand is so [I]basic [/I](ahem) it's not even worth making a separate long thread. And I do those at the drop of a hat. As I wrote in the OP- [B]Holmes [/B](1977) Strangely, Holmes Basic is NOT "Basic" D&D like Moldvay and Mentzer, but is OD&D. Specifically, it was supposed to be a codification, for beginners (a "basic" ruleset) of the OD&D rules, and ended up having a tacked-on introduction to 1e. None of this is, or should be, in dispute. This is what Holmes was tasked with (re-doing OD&D into a basic set) and the published version explicitly references the upcoming AD&D. It was akin to what we would now call a "starter set." Moreover, the version of OD&D that was being played when Holmes and the MM/PHB were released was pretty [U]advanced[/U]; those advances were codified in many ways in the PHB. The core PHB AD&D classes were ... OD&D classes. Assassin? Blackmoor supplement. Bard? Strategic Review v. 2 #1. Cleric? Men & Magic. Druid? Eldritch Wizardry. Illusionist? Strategic Review v. 1 #4. Fighter? Chainmail, Men & Magic. Magic User? Chainmail, Men & Magic. Monk? Blackmoor. Paladin? Greyhawk. Ranger? Strategic Review, v. 1 #2. Thief? Great Plains Newsletter #9, Greyhawk. Everything, from race-is-not-class, to the artifacts and relics, to the psionics- that was all OD&D. AD&D is (re-written, advanced, codified) OD&D. It's not that hard. And since Holmes is OD&D (that is what he was supposed to write), it's all part of the same lineage. Which brings up the question- what is the Moldvay line? How is it that it resembles D&D so closely? Well, um ... BECAUSE IT'S D&D???? I mean, it's pretty hard to get more ... basic ... than that! Of course, underlying all of this is the lawsuit between Arneson and TSR. This timeline is confirmed by just looking at the dates. In 1980, Gygax confirmed in Dragon that there would be an upcoming expansion of the Holmes' basic rules into expert rules. At the same time, B2 began to be packaged with the Holmes set (notably, B2 was written with OD&D rules- not B/X). At some time between that notification and 1981, the story changed, and Moldvay wrote the "new" basic set. Importantly, and this is for background- the whole concept behind "basic sets" was explicated; that they were to introduce players to playing D&D (AD&D). So, if this was the case, then why did Moldvay/Cook (and later Mentzer with BECMI) have a completely separate route than the earlier OD&D/AD&D line? [I]EDIT- just checked and confirmed; the settlement was in March 1981. Given the amount of time these negotiations would take to finalize, and the amount of time between the initial filing and the settlement, the timeline fits that the switch from the original plan of just having an expansion to Holmes to having Moldvay rush out a new Basic set in 1981 that credited both Gygax and Arneson was part of the settlement negotiations. [/I] Well, the settlement regarding royalties arguably played [U]the [/U]major part. It is generally accepted that Arneson received 2.5% of the AD&D royalties (from 5% of the OD&D royalties), but TSR was required to keep a separate version in print with the original royalties; hence, the sudden need for a forked version. Therefore, the basic line. Which is why you end up with the confusion; AD&D is the OD&D line, as the additional supplements and articles during the 70s shows. It's pretty simple. The Moldvay/Cook line developed into a separate system (BECMI, RC) because the entire purpose was to look back to the LBBs (the Arneson originals), simplify them (race as class, etc.), and from that starting point ... the game eventually branched off even further. (Final side note- [USER=7015759]@Rob Kuntz[/USER] once remarked here that Arneson made much more from his royalties than did Gygax, so there's that) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
A New Taxonomy for TSR-Era D&D
Top