Basic D&D rides again!

[Aaron L]

Cowboys & Indians is the only true roleplaying game. All later attempts are just pale imitations of the original.

 

[Halivar]

Cowboys & Indians is the only true roleplaying game. All later attempts are just pale imitations of the original.

Shush! You'll wake Diaglo!

 

[Corinth]

Until I see more details surrounding both the concept and the execution of the revived idea, I must regard this as a very bad and counter-productive decision.

 

[Krieg]

You wound me, sir. And yet I'm laughing.

If it helps I am prone to rants myself.

FWIW I don't think that a "basic" or "rules light" D20 or OGL game is a bad idea at all. There certainly is a market for it among gamers who feel that the current D20 rules are too mechanics heavy & limiting.

Troll Lord's C&C seems to have generated quite a bit of interest among the old school D&D grognards.

As for Warduke...was it silly? No doubt. However I think that ..."utterly devoid of merit in every conceivable sense. Infuriatingly puerile."... is IMO a gross overreaction. Take the stat block out of it's action figure context and you have a usable NPC.

Is a bit of nostalgic silliness really that out of place in a game where adults pretend to be lazy halfling thieves with lisps & drinking problems?
I would certainly hope not!

That would be my bet, too. Basically, something like the old box set WotC put out, but with minis, too. I wouldn't be surprised if there were a miniature or two that was only available in the Basic Set (thus encouraging the "IT MUST BE MINE!" mini collectors to buy the Basic Set).

If this is the case I would probably cross over to the "against" side of the fence. A streamlined/rules-lite D20/OGL game would be far more interesting than a rehashed board game to me.

Cowboys & Indians is the only true roleplaying game. All later attempts are just pale imitations of the original.

Psshah...that's nothing more than a cheap "Spartans & Persians" ripoff!

Until I see more details surrounding both the concept and the execution of the revived idea, I must regard this as a very bad and counter-productive decision.

Think it might be a good idea to hold-off on the "counterproductive" decision until after you see those additional details?

 

[trancejeremy]

Really though, "Basic" D&D wasn't so basic, at least by the time they got through all the box sets and supplements.

In many ways, it was actually more complex than AD&D. The only real simplification was merging race & class, somewhat.

The scope was somewhat different, too, with the PCs expected to build castles/strongholds and maybe even become gods (eventually).

 

[MerricB]

I doubt this will be as much a separate game as the Metzner Basic D&D developed into.

Think of it as the Beginners version of D&D 3.5E, and think of everything that could be done to teach beginners the basics, and hope they are included!

Cheers!

 

[dcas]

What would really be cool is if WoTC's "Basic D&D" so resembled Troll Lords' C&C that the latter sued the former! Of course, I just love contention.

 

[Henry]

Nah, I doubt that WotC would go that far back.

Troll Lords' project is going to be interesting to see, to say the least, because the people working on it have a vested interest in a version close enough to AD&D that Gary G. and Rob K. can write "Zagyg's Castle" in it.

 

[jrients]

Really though, "Basic" D&D wasn't so basic, at least by the time they got through all the box sets and supplements.

It's all a matter of perspective. The Basic, Expert, Companion, Master, & Immortal Rules altogether were fairly complex. By themselves, all the D&D Basic Rules I've seen were pretty light and breezy by today's standards. The '81 Basic/Expert duo was pretty simple but still had tons and tons of potential. I still say the '81 Basic/Expert rules are the pinnacle of game design. Those little booklets are some of the tighest game writing I've ever seen.

In many ways, it was actually more complex than AD&D. The only real simplification was merging race & class, somewhat.

I think you might want to crack open your 1st edition AD&D books. Try reading the sections on making sure the dice rolls you made qualify you for the class and race you want. Or the attribute charts. Or the weapon charts. (Speed factor? Weapon vs armor type? Space needed?) Or the rules on spell components. Or the alignment system. Movement by inches means 10 feet indoors but 10 yards outdoors, but areas in inches work differently? Training to level. Or the entire DMG chapter on combat.

The scope was somewhat different, too, with the PCs expected to build castles/strongholds and maybe even become gods (eventually).

Strongholds have been a core feature in Dungeons & Dragons games up until 3e came out. The marginalization of these rules has been to the deteriment of the game, IMHO.

 

[diaglo]

Original D&D(1974) is the only true game. All the other editions are just a poor imitation of the real thing.


it was never Basic to me.

interesting too is how the "Advanced" rules are being released by another company.