Flowchart of the Editions

[diaglo]

besides pulling out the different covers for 1edADnD. you may note that they went thru some changes with printings.

and added more rules with different hardbacks. the more common DMG you have in your chart is actually 1979 Revised.

edit: the big noted change everyone knows about of course was the DDG (1980). which went from 144 pages to 128.

 

[tenkar]

Missing UA from first edition... it was pretty much core in all the groups i knew

 

[diaglo]

Missing UA from first edition... it was pretty much core in all the groups i knew

yeah, 1985 added UA and then you get DSG and WSG edit: in 1986. and a whole lotta skills and nonweapon prof. to 1edADnD.

but you also got DL added then.

edit2: and OA and GA

at the end of 1edADnD you get the grey boxed set FR.

 

[an_idol_mind]

Looks to me like you're missing the "Classic Dungeons & Dragons" set that came out in 1994. It was basically a repackaging of the 1991 black box, though.

I think there was also a 1998 D&D set, but that might have been an introduction to AD&D instead.

 

[DestroyYouAlot]

Honestly, I think you're pretty much done. You might want to include the OD&D Supplements after the "3 brown books" box as a seperate link between OD&D and AD&D (the way some folks see it, Holmes went one way, and 3BB + Supplements went another, leading to AD&D). Maybe UA in the orange-spine AD&D era. But for the most part, that's the story. Nice work.

Edit: Ooh - also, "Wrath of the Immortals" was a follow-up to the Rules Cyclopedia. It was a campaign, but it also included the BECMI Immortals Set rules that the RC left out.

Second edit: Some folks would consider "2.5" - i.e., Skills & Powers / Combat & Tactics - to be its own subset / edition.

 

[rossik]

if you include UA, you may include the players options for 2ed, as noted above

Looks to me like you're missing the "Classic Dungeons & Dragons" set that came out in 1994. It was basically a repackaging of the 1991 black box, though.

I think there was also a 1998 D&D set, but that might have been an introduction to AD&D instead.

thats the one in my link, right?

 

[Darkwolf71]

If you're just going for the 'core' stuff...

OD&D Supplements: No

1st ed UA: Yes

2nd ed Players options: No

Wrath of the Immortals: Yes

IMO.

 

[Snapdragyn]

Pretty, but I'm afraid I can't read them.

From what I can make out, I have the 2nd row of covers of the AD&D books (top grey-colored square after the split). I also have the far left boxed set from the black-colored square after the split - what is that one called in the 'proper' naming lingo?

 

[Jack Daniel]

Yeah, for the last edition of Original D&D, you definitely need to put Wrath of the Immortals next to the Rules Cyclopedia and the New/Classic set.

Those sets taken together make up the complete Classic D&D edition.

 

[TerraDave]

1)You definately need to add the other ODD supplements.

2) I am not so sure about having that first basic set as a precursor to ADD, I don't really think it was.

3) There have been a number of "starter sets". Not sure you want to include any.