D&D General Back to First Principles

[Reynard]

I really want to run a BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia campaign.

Sure, part of it is simple nostalgia (it's the edition I started with some 35 years ago) but it is also the desire to return to First Principles.

I was paging through my copy of the Rules Cyclopedia (Aaron Allston's second greatest rpg work after Strikeforce) and I was really grabbed by the core elements: slow advancement, simple rules, the changing game, war and domain management, and slim monster stat blocks. Plus intelligent swords.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I really want to run a BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia campaign.

Sure, part of it is simple nostalgia (it's the edition I started with some 35 years ago) but it is also the desire to return to First Principles.

I was paging through my copy of the Rules Cyclopedia (Aaron Allston's second greatest rpg work after Strikeforce) and I was really grabbed by the core elements: slow advancement, simple rules, the changing game, war and domain management, and slim monster stat blocks. Plus intelligent swords.

What are the First Principles?

 

[Reynard]

What are the First Principles?

I listed them in my OP.

But let me be clear, since it seems to be a necessity these days: I am NOT decreeing some sort immutable definition of The One True Way.it is not my intent with this thread to tell you all you are doing it wrong.

This is a discussion forum. I want to discuss things. Let's chat, yeah?

 

[aco175]

I feel that the rules have advance so much since I placed 1e or basic that I would be frustrated by the lack of options. The basic fighter had 1 attack and that was about it. Now, they have action surge and 2nd wind. Then you get 2 attacks and a feat or two to do more and make your fighter different than others.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I listed them in my OP.

But let me be clear, since it seems to be a necessity these days: I am NOT decreeing some sort immutable definition of The One True Way.it is not my intent with this thread to tell you all you are doing it wrong.

This is a discussion forum. I want to discuss things. Let's chat, yeah?

Ah, I didn't realize those were them.

What is it that you like about the First Principles?

 

[DND_Reborn]

It is funny you should mention this. I've been developing a 5E MOD for several months now, and the more I work on it the more I found myself returning to B/X and BEMCI books. There is a simplicity to characters that I miss a lot, which 5E does not really embrace with its plethora of classes and especially subclasses.

Although I've kept most of the subclasses, a few classes have been transferred to subclasses of other classes. HP are lower, ACs are higher, advancement is slower, and the monsters I'm adapted to the MOD as examples are only about 50.

I'll be interested to hear how your game goes!

 

[Zardnaar]

Back to basics might be a better term.

B/X offers a lot of advantages over modern D&D.

Eg complete doodle to run comparatively.

B/X and BECMI were ahead of their time in a lot of ways (and terrible in others).

 

[Reynard]

I feel that the rules have advance so much since I placed 1e or basic that I would be frustrated by the lack of options. The basic fighter had 1 attack and that was about it. Now, they have action surge and 2nd wind. Then you get 2 attacks and a feat or two to do more and make your fighter different than others.

What do you mean by "advanced"? I don't necessarily see more class abilities as an "advancement" if it doesn't make the game better.

 

[Reynard]

Ah, I didn't realize those were them.

What is it that you like about the First Principles?

Like I said, some of it is no doubt tied up.in nostalgia and I am.happy to own that.

But also the simplicity of player characters, IMO, improves the game by promoting player creativity versus searching the character sheet for an answer.

I think slow leveling helps refocus play on what's happening now instead of when I get my next level.

I think the changing game helps fold the idea of gaining levels into the fiction of the world.

 

[aco175]

What do you mean by "advanced"? I don't necessarily see more class abilities as an "advancement" if it doesn't make the game better.

In my opinion, more options do make it better. I remember older editions and it was fine because that was all there was. Each edition has given players more options to make your PC better fit your concept, although 4e/5e need better multiclass rules.

It is kind of like when you wonder how cool it would be to live in colonial times or the middle ages and such. Then you start to get real and think about no electricity/heat/medical/travel/lifespan/etc. You realize how much better you have it now.