Basic D&D rides again!

MerricB

Eternal Optimist
Supporter
As noted in this thread, a new edition of the D&D Basic Set is due out in Fall 2004.

That's too far away for my liking. However, what do you hope is in the set? How do you hope it simplifies the rules?

Personally, I think they could do worse than reprint the Moldvay Basic set of '81, along with updates to the 3E rules. :)

Cheers!
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Joshua -

Until the release of D&D3e, I quite happily ran "Basic" (original - Basic, Expert, Companion, Master) Dungeons and Dragons.

I gave up AD&D right before the release of AD&D2e, pulled out my OD&D rules and ran by those for YEARS.

I only gave them up when we started running D&D3e.

Thus, I can still see playing by the simplified rules of "Basic" D&D to this day. Especially in a purely dungeoneering environment where skills are secondary to class abilities.

I'm certainly looking forward to what this set may bring.
 

The reason that I'm so interested in the set is my missionary side. ;)

I really enjoy introducing new players to the game. However, I also see a lot of people picking up the game on their own, and 3.5E is something I've occasionally referred to as "Advanced Advanced Dungeons & Dragons". It's not so friendly for the complete newbie.

There is a need for an introductory product that teaches the beginner the basics of playing and DMing (especially the latter), and that is more wide in scope than the original 3E basic game - which worked more like a board game than elsewise.

Cheers!
 

Oh, I can see playing with Basic indefinately if you started there. I have very fond memories of the old Red Box D&D. But after playing 3e in all it's "glory" it would seem (presumably) restrictive and lacking in options.

I'm really glad WotC is making one, for the "missionary" aspect, and I'm sure I'll pick it up and read it, but I have a hard time believing I'd ever play it.
 

MerricB said:
However, what do you hope is in the set? How do you hope it simplifies the rules?

I'm betting they'll limit the feat and spell list, as well as combat options. No grappling, trips, sunders, or disarms; no AOOs; and maybe no distinction between Move actions and Attack actions (everybody just gets one action: move, attack, cast, use magic item, or charge).

Stuff like drawing weapons or equipment (and the distinction between the two) will be eliminated. The "characters are encouraged not to use ranged weapons or cast spells while threatened, because such actions provoke AOOs" rule will be streamlined into "Characters cannot use ranged weapons or cast spells if they are adjacent to an enemy".

Synergy bonuses will go away, and I bet the skill list will be streamlined (no open-ended Knowledge, Craft, or Profession skills). Maybe they'll eliminate skill choice (especially cross-class skills) and instead give classes fixed skill ranks in fixed skills (like the AD&D thief).

I wonder if they'll keep the rules for spells per day and spell preperation, or instead use the simpler and far more familiar Mana Point system? In other words, instead of a 1st level Wizard with a 14 Int having 2 first level spell slots, he'll instead have 2 mana points (and 1st level spells cost 1 mana each). The whole concept of slots and preperation may go away; the New Basic D&D might forgo Wizards and Cleric in favor of Sorcerers and Favored Souls.

Hmm.. it'll be interesting to see what they do.

They'll undoubtedly include minis and dice.

Actually, BAM, there you go: I predict the new BASIC D&D will simply be the Miniatures Skirmish game rules packaged with monster figures as well as PC figures, treasure and level tables (and a guide on how to modify the mini's stats), a slim "DM's guide", and an adventure.

-z
 



This is an unwelcome development in my book. I mean no disrespect to anyone who came to the game through OD&D/Basic/whatever but I think this is taking a step backwards. 3e was the best thing to ever happen to D&D, in part because it meant no more confusion between Basic and Advanced for newcomers.

Maybe the majority would like to see the word "Advanced" gracing the fourth edition.

The worst thing I've seen in Dungeon for years was the cover feature for 105, Warduke, the Critical Threat based on an action figure. For crying out loud, this was utterly devoid of merit in every conceivable sense. Infuriatingly puerile.

Is it really necessary to have a simplified rules system and the infantile merchandise that will inevitably accompany it? I am not looking forward to this release at all.
 

Don't hold back, Ranes. Tell us what you really think. ;)

But seriously, some of us didn't come to 3e "through" OD&D/Basic/whatever. You make it sound like we all grew up and now of course play 3e in preference to other versions. Some of us think that OD&D is still just as valid a way to play as the crunch-crunch-crunch so in vogue right now. Otherwise Troll Lords would not be working on C&C. Otherwise D&D Rules Cyclopedia would be collecting dust in bargin bins.

And D&D is a less accessible game then it was when I got started. I was a 10-year-old kid with the '81 Basic Set who didn't know anyone who could teach him how to play. I spent a whole summer trying to absorb Tom Moldvay's masterful version of D&D before I even ran a game. How long would that have taken with three core books each several times longer than the basic rules? Would I have even tried? Would I have shelled out the extra money?

The hobby needs more Basic sets of all sorts, in my opinion.
 

Remove ads

Top