If you started playing D&D with the Basic D&D rules, which edition was it?

[Orius]

Was the Cyclopedia based on the '83 ruleset?

I believe the Cyclopedia was a compliation an revision of those rules, and it included some campaign background for Mystara. I'm not really sure, since I've only seen one of the basic red books (I think that's what it was) once, and I haven't seen or touched a Cyclopedia in 10 years.

What did the '91 basic box consist of? Was it essentially a prettied up re-release of the Mentzer books?

Ok, that I have. The black box was an introductory set to D&D intended for new players and DMs to learn the game and was more or less an introduction to the Cyclopedia. It had a DM screen with a pocket that held 48 Dragon Cards, which explained the basic mechanics of the game. The cards were meant to be read by the DM, and it was a sort of tutorial on the game. You followed the text on each card which was set up like those old Choose Your Own adventure books I read when I was a kid. The cards also explained the rules a little. There was also an intro adventure for the players, which followed more or less the adventure on the DM cards, and the DM was meant to run the parts of the adventure after reading the cards and learning the rules.

The box also included a poster map and fold up paper counters for the intro adventure. Finally, there was a 64 page rule book which had rules for the fighter, cleric, magic-user, thief, dwarf, elf and halfling characters to 5th level, a basic equipment list, spells up to 2nd level cleric spells and 3rd level magic-user spells, a bunch of monster stats, and treasure tables with some basic magic items.

Oh, yeah, almost forgot. There was a set of polyhedral dice too.

At least one (if not both) of the '96 & '99 sets were little more than a D&Dified board game...are there any major differences between the two?

I don't know.

If I'm not mistaken, the '99 set was based on the Quick Play rules written by Jeff Grubb and first featured in Dragon #251. The Quick Play rules also had two intro adventures, Eye of the Wyvern, and Wrath of the Minotaur (or something like that). I don't have the adventure, but I do have a copy of Dragon #251, and the Quick Play rules weren't classic D&D, but rather a stripped-down version of AD&D 2e meant to be easily digestable by new players.

 

[Easy_Tiger]

I remember getting the red box in about 1985 . Men wanted to be me and women wanted me . Was the idea of the basic game to get younger people (i was 9 at the time) into the game and then onto advanced i know it was a different game world but i never did find out why my only memories of the red box is that picture of the evil wizard with the magic missile about to shoot the cleric, so sad when she died . Still good fun times i have played every edition since and have enjoyed them all, any kind of d and d for me is good d and d

 

[dead]

I love my Holmes edition Basic Set dearly, and am still using its Zenopus's Tower sample dungeon in my Porttown campaign, but calling it "handsome" is further than I'm willing to go. Its art quality is far below that of its contemporary, the AD&D Monster Manual (1979), and the PHB just blows it out of the water visually.

Maybe other folks' "old days" were handsomer than mine...

Sorry, I'm thinking of the Red Box (Mentzer). That was a handsome box.

 

[Zudrak]

...Erol Otus is the man

Hear! Hear!

When I first played D&D in the Moldvay box set, I was in pure ecstasy. I had to be the DM from the start and the Otus artwork in that and other works was the best inspiration for me. His work in the G1-3/D1-3/Q1 series is as memorable to me as is the adventure series itself.

I was hoping he would be a prominent artist in 3/3.5 edition. I hope to see more of his work since his recent module cover for a d20 company whose name eludes me. I think it's the company with the "Third edition rules, first edition feel" slogan. Oh, to be 10 again with a memory that functions all the time...

 

[Ourph]

Moldvay is the shizzle. And Erol Otus is the man

True. But you forgot the "inspirational" Jeff Dee!

Morgan Ironwolf, why every 10 year old boy should have a copy of the Moldvay Basic D&D book!

 

[dead]

In fact, the Red, Blue, Green, Black, and Gold would make a handsome set.

I used to own all these to but sold them in my foolish adolesence.

Did anyone get a Basic D&D character from 1st to 36th level then advance to Immortal rules?

(For those not in the know, 36th level was the highest level of advancement [see Black box] before you went onto Immortal rules and started a new progression table beginning at either 0-level or 1st-level Immortal [?])

 

[Cthulhu's Librarian]

Moldvey for me.

As far as art goes, Jeff Dee and Erol Otus will always be the visions I have in my head for so many iconic images. Other artists after them may be more complex and "cool", but their styles define fantasy art for me.

 

[Creamsteak]

Mentzer Basic Set, though my copy was ancient, tattered, and the artwork on the cover at least appeared to be different as I recall it.

 

[MerricB]

With regard to the evolution of the rules of Basic D&D:

Holmes - The rules are based directly on the original D&D game, though with some amendments based on the development of AD&D. Most interesting is the alignment system. There are five alignments used: LG, LE, CG, CE and True Neutral. Original D&D (and later editions of Basic D&D) used just Lawful, Neutral and Chaotic, whilst AD&D used the system we use today in 3E.

Another interesting point is the bonuses provided for high ability scores - they ignore the additions added to oD&D in the Greyhawk supplement, and use the oD&D versions. Thus, you gain a bonus or penalty to XP based on your prime requisite score, a bonus to hit points based on your Constitution, and a bonus to hit with missile weapons based on your Dexterity, but nothing else.

One trend of later versions of Basic D&D is introduced here: the 'classes' are Fighting Man, Magic-User, Cleric, Thief, Dwarf, Elf and Halfling. For the first time, the future of the elf multi-class is presented: In oD&D, elves had to choose whether to act as a fighter or a magic-user for the duration of the adventure. In Holmes, they can use both functions, but XP is split evenly between the two classes.

Compared to later editions of the game, the rules are poorly presented, although even this is a big improvement on original D&D!

Moldvay - The edition I began with, and, in my opinion, the best introductory set. (In truth, I started with both Moldvay and AD&D at the same time, but I owned Moldvay before I owned AD&D).

Following on from the faltering steps of Holmes, Tom Moldvay constructed a much more robust system. Retained is the system of the seven "classes", although the elf, dwarf and halfling now are self-contained. (Each has their own XP table!)

The biggest advance was in the handling of the ability scores: all ability scores has its use, although not to the diverse version of AD&D. Instead, we have the direct ancestor of the 3E ability score table! It's arranged differently, but the idea is the same. (The one exception is the table for Charisma, which adds Loyalty scores).

Otherwise, the style of writing and the presentation of the rules made this an extremely accessible introductory set.

The corresponding Expert set (levels 4-14) was compiled by David "Zeb" Cook, but it remains a set I don't possess. Plans were also made to create a Companion set to deal with levels 15-36, but it was overtaken by the next edition.

Mentzer - The big change Frank Mentzer brought to the Basic rules was to split them into two booklets: a player's book and a DM's book. I've never cared to really compare the rules in Moldvay and Menzter; they're mostly the same, except for a few minor variances.

The change in presentation was the key. My most vivid memory of this set (which I possess, but is currently on extended loan to a friend) is the "Choose your own adventure" was included in the Player's book. All in all, I found Mentzer Basic not as engaging as Moldvay's edition, but it was more professionally presented in terms of art and production values.

A revision of Expert D&D followed (surprisingly, only in one book, unlike the rest of the line). This is the edition I possess.

At last, Companion Rules D&D came out: levels 15-25. Probably the most interesting thing about this set is that it is dedicated to Brian Blume!

Master Rules D&D (levels 26-36) managed to introduce the Weapon Mastery system, which probably meant the ret-conning of characters, and the paths to Immortality, the consequences of which were described in the final box set: Immortal Rules D&D.

Allston - Released in 1991, the "New, Easy to Master Dungeons & Dragons Game" or the Black Box set was the first version of Basic D&D to cover levels 1-5 rather than levels 1-3. (I find that the current versions of 3E Basic D&D only cover levels 1-2 is rather annoying!)

More significant was the D&D Rules Cyclopedia (edited by Aaron Allston), which combined the Basic, Expert, Companion and Master sets of Mentzer into one volume. This 304-page tome is one of those things that lovers of early D&D should possess.

Also produced at this time was a new version of the Immortals set: Wrath of the Immortals, which, in addition to the new rules, provided an adventure which completely shook up the Known World/Mystara. Unlike the Rules Cyclopedia, Wrath of the Immortals was a new set of rules, only somewhat descended from the previous Immortal Rules.

After this, three further versions of the D&D Basic set were produced, but I know little of them.

Hope this has been of help!

Cheers!

 

[elmuthalleth]

I started play with the Red Box ( Mentzer ) in Italian .
Then , Rules Cyclopedia , and then 3rd edition .