Can someone list all versions of D&D and explain their differences to me?

[Skullfyre]

The Rules Cyclopedia was also around that time, and I think that was just about the end of the Basic D&D line. I never got to experience the book but have heard from many that it was quite good -- really covered just about everything in one big hardcover book.

It was a rocking book!
best compilation of the Basic/Expert/Companion/Expert/Immortal line.

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

Re: A clarification

Actually, OD&D (the 1974, pre-Basic version) did NOT feature races as classes. Halflings were limited to being fighters, so the effect was the same. Elves, OTOH, could be fighters, magic-users, or fighter/magic-users, whereas in Basic they are always fighter/magic-users. Dwarves, IIRC, were also limited to fighters, again making the distinction academic. The blue book version of D&D instituted the race=class business.

I thought in the first version, elves had to choose between being a fighting-man or a magic-user before every adventure.

 

[Neowolf]

Ah, I think that black box you're referring to (mid-late 1980s?) was a kind of "intro to AD&D" set and I believe it was for 2nd edition. Kind of the same relationship between 3E and the D&D Adventure Game.

The Rules Cyclopedia was also around that time, and I think that was just about the end of the Basic D&D line. I never got to experience the book but have heard from many that it was quite good -- really covered just about everything in one big hardcover book.

I had the same set, and it was also my intro to D&D. If it was an intro to 2E, then it also borrowed some elements of earlier incarnations of the game too. The thing that sticks out in my mind is that Elf, Dwarf, and Halfling were all classes. I can't put my hands on the set right now though (I'm off at college, it's at my mom's house) to relate any other differences.

 

[Qlippoth]

Dungeons & Dragons (1981) Red box and book (2nd edition of the blue book game)
- author forgotten

Tom Moldvay

I can't remember what I had for dinner yesterday, yet this sticks in my head across the gulfs of time.

 

[Tratyn Runewind]

Hello!

Posted by diaglo:
yes. it [the D&D Rules Cyclopedia] combined and revised the rules for the 5 boxed sets.

Basic, Expert, Companion, Masters, and some of the Immortals.

It also included a fair bit of stuff from the Gazetteers, including some nice map sections and the basics of the standard BD&D campaign world (the Known World, aka Mystara), and the General Skills system, the BD&D version of non-weapon proficiencies.

Posted by Griswold:
The Rules Cyclopedia is very nice if you play "Basic D&D". The only thing that was not included was the detailed immortal stuff.

Yes, the only Immortals stuff in the book is the basic guidelines that were in the boxed Master's set. If I remember correctly, at the time the Rules Cyclopedia came out, it was already realized that the old "gold box" Immortals set had some problems, and the Wrath of the Immortals boxed set may have already been in the works to correct them (as well as to shake up the Mystara campaign setting VERY drastically).

Posted by EricNoah:
I never got to experience the book but have heard from many that it was quite good -- really covered just about everything in one big hardcover book.

Your sources are right...but then, we've already seen around here that you have excellent sources, haven't we...

Posted by Tiefling:
Too... many... printings... variations... revisions... editions...

I can't take it!

And that's not even all of it - the Acaeum only covers stuff put out up until 1990 or so. There's almost ten years of stuff you're NOT seeing...

Hope this helps!