TSR [Let's Read] Dungeons & Dragons Basic Rules, by Tom Moldvay

Iosue

Legend
MONSTER LIST: Acolyte to Zombie

On to the Monsters of Moldvay Basic!

On the first page we have the Acolyte and the Bandit, essentially monster versions of PC classes. Acolytes have an AC of 2, which seems to suggest they are wearing plate and carry shields. Bandits, in the meantime, have an AC of 6. Leather armor and implicit Dex bonus, perhaps? Both still use the standard d8 monster Hit Die. Also, this page is the first with art in a while! An Erol Otus depiction of an Ape, White. Can't find a pic of it on the Internet, though...

The next page features two kinds of Bat ( Normal and Giant ), four kinds of Bear ( Black, Grizzly, Polar, and Cave), and three kinds of Beetle, Giant (Fire, Oil, and Tiger). IMO, this page demonstrates two things. One is the succinctness of Moldvay's rules. On one page we have essentially nine monsters of various level and abilities. The other is what may now appear to be the curious decision to include monsters far beyond the level of Basic characters. The four bears go from HD 4 to HD 7. The HD 4 Black Bear might appear on the 3rd level of a dungeon, but it seems highly unlikely that the HD 7 Cave Bear, with its vicious 1-8/1-8/2-12 claw/claw/bite routine, would do so. It's certainly one thing that reinforces the idea of challenges that players would not necessarily be expected to defeat by straight combat.

The next page lists the Beserker, Boar, Bugbear, Carrion Crawler, and five kinds of Cat, Great (Mountain Lion, Panther, Lion, Tiger, and Sabre-tooth Tiger). There's a Diesel LaForce pic of the classic Carrion Crawler. This (and the Mentzer DMB's one) is how I always picture them; I never really cared for the green-skinned WotC versions.

Next we have Cave Locust, Centipede, Giant, Doppleganger, and...Dragon! These are, of course, the most powerful monsters in Basic, possibly in Expert, as well, with low ACs, high HD, and dangerous Breath Weapons. But there's something else I want to draw attention to here. Dragons were given a huge upgrade in BECMI and AD&D 2nd Ed, in order to make them more powerful, dangerous foes for the PCs, and this trend has continued in subsequent editions, including 5e. And to be sure, at first glance this does seem somewhat necessary. Even the mighty Gold only has AC -2 (which 10th level fighters can hit with a 14 or better, without any STR bonus or magic weapons), and 11 HD averages out to only 50 HP. Certainly, a dragon is not an epic foe for a party of name-level PCs. But there's one line in the stat block that I think gets really overlooked. No. Appearing! All dragons have a No. Appearing of 1-4, in both dungeon and wilderness! That means you only have a 25% chance of encountering a solo dragon, and a 75% of encounter multiple dragons at a time! To an extent, I think No. Appearing being overlooked is true not just of dragons, but other D&D monsters as well. Most are designed to be encountered in groups, but it seems like only the old standards such as kobolds, goblins, orcs, gnolls, and lower level undead are really thought of being encountered in groups.

Other than the Gold Dragon, none of the other metallic dragons are included in Basic, with the chromatics of White, Black, Green, Blue, and Red making the cut. However, while Golds are of course Lawful alignment, and Blacks, Greens, and Reds are Chaotic, Whites and Blues are Neutral, suggesting that in B/X they may not necessarily be evil. The Dragon entry takes up most of the next page, as well, with sub-sections for Breath Weapon Damage (up to 3 times, randomly decided, damage equal to the dragons current HP), Shape of Breath (includes the iconic pic of breath weapon shapes), Saving Throws (for breath weapons: save for half-damage), Talking (clarifies that only talking dragons can use spells, but the chance of talking only goes up to 50% for Reds, except for Golds who always talk and cast spells), Sleeping Dragons (basically a free attack round, since you only get a +2, and they wake after the first attack; no coup de grace here!), Subduing Dragons (all attacks made with "flat of the sword", no magic or missiles; subdued dragons must be sold at a maximum of 1,000 gp per hit point), Age (younger dragons up to 3 HD lower, older dragons up to 3 HD hire), Treasure (only in lair, and 1/4 to 1/2 less for younger dragons), and Gold Dragons (always talk and use spells, can also change shape, and can use both fire and chlorine gas breath weapons). The page ends with an entry for the surprisingly tough but somewhat anti-climatic Driver Ant. (That said, 6' long and never fails morale when hungry! Yipes!)

The next page has many of the classics: Dwarf, Elf, Ferret, Giant, Gargoyle, Gelatinous Cube, Ghoul, Gnoll, and Gnome. The next page has even more: Goblin, Gray Ooze, Green Slime, Halfling, Harpy, and Hobgoblin. Interestingly, the Elf gets 1+1 HD, while the Halfling gets 1-1, despite PC elves and halflings using the d6 Hit Die.

The next page contains Insect Swarms, Killer Bee, Kobold, and Living Statue, with the last being unique to B/X and BECMI. Living Statues come in Crystal, Iron, and Rock. This page also has an Erol Otus kobold picture.

The next page contains four kinds of Lizards, Giant (Gecko, Draco, Horned Chameleon, and Tuatara), Lizard Man, and five kinds of Lycanthropes (Wererat, Werewolf, Wereboar, Weretiger, and Werebear). While werebears were Chaotic Good in AD&D, their D&D counterparts were the decidedly more uncertain Neutral. However, their description notes them as intelligent even in animal form, and possibly friendly if peacably approached. I suspect this reflects the vagaries of the single-axis D&D alignment. Werebears are obviously inspired by the perilous, grumpy, but ultimately good Beorn of the Hobbit. In AD&D, this could be relatively easily mapped to Chaotic Good, but since in D&D Chaotic often maps to "evil", Neutral was used to better express Beorn's ambiguity.

The next page contains another PC-class monster with the Medium, followed by the Medusa, Minotaur, Mule, Neanderthal (Caveman), and Noble.

The following page has Normal Human (weaker than PC-class characters), NPC Party, Ochre Jelly, Ogre, Orc, and Owl Bear. Interesting the owl bear is two words instead of a compound! The orc gets four paragraphs of description, much more than goblins, kobolds, and the like. It also notes that they may often be hired as low cost soldiers!

The next page has the Pixie, two kinds of Rat (Normal and Giant), Robber Fly, Rock Baboon, Rust Monster, and Shadow. A Bill Willingham pic does double-duty for both the pixie and the rust monster.

Next come Shrew, Giant, Shrieker, Skeleton, and five kinds of Snake (Spitting Cobra, Pit Viper, Sea Snake, Giant Rattler, and Rock Python). The snakes are rough. Relatively easy to kill, but four of them are poisonous (pit viper, sea snake, and giant rattler are lethal; the spitting cobra's poison only blinds), and on a successful hit, the Rock Python does bite damage and immediately begins doing 2d4 squeezing damage per round. Thanks to the lack of damage types in D&D, swords suffer no damage penalty vs. skeletons. However, with 3-12 appearing, immunity to sleep and charm, and with perfect morale, skeletons are relentless and scary.

The next page offers three kinds of Spider, Giant (Crab Spider, Black Widow, and Tarantella), Sprite, Stirge, Thoul, and Trader. That's actually "tarantella", not "tarantula". These are huge, hairy magical spiders, whose poison causes a painful, but non-damaging, non-lethal spasmodic "dance". Here's a pic. The thoul is another D&D original, not found in AD&D or WotC D&D. It's a magical combination of ghoul, hobgoblin, and troll. Apparently, they look like hobgoblins, paralyze like ghouls, and regenerate like trolls. I'm definitely statting these bad boys up for 5e once the DMG drops!

Our last page of monsters contains Troglodyte, the final PC-class NPC with the Veteran, Wight, two kinds of Wolf (Normal Wolf and Dire Wolf), Yellow Mold, and the Zombie wraps everything up. The troglodyte has a Bill Willingham pic that I've always remembered. Unlike the other PC-class NPCs, the Veteran gets variable HD: 1-3, to represent sergeants and the like.

Coming up next, Treasure!
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad


pemerton

Legend
[MENTION=6680772]Iosue[/MENTION], it's good to see this thread resurrected!

I remember the Thoul and the Living Statute as Moldvay monsters with no AD&D counterpart. (But some of the invertebrates also, I think - driver ants, tarantella spiders, some of the beetles maybe? But they're less memorable.)

I think I faced a blue dragon at the end of the first dungeon I played as a beginning Basic player. My memory is that it killed my PCs! I agree with you that there was a degree of mis-match between some of the monsters, and the PC power levels. If that was meant to suggest non-combat alternatives to resolution, I think it would hav been helpful to have a bit more designer commentary/guidance on that.

On alignment - I like the neutral elves, werebears and dragons. A bit like 4e's "unaligned", I think it makes for better encounter design and adjudication than "chaotic good" or "..... evil", which tend to prefigure too much of the resolution in advance.

On number appearing - I think we'll see this revisited when we get to the DMing chapter. The figures in the monster chapter en up, I think, mostly being used to determine how much treasure the monsters should have when encountered in a dungeon.

On saving throws - do you know the beginning of the tradition of doppelgangers having such good saves?
 


Iosue

Legend
I remember the Thoul and the Living Statute as Moldvay monsters with no AD&D counterpart. (But some of the invertebrates also, I think - driver ants, tarantella spiders, some of the beetles maybe? But they're less memorable.)

Yeah, as far as animals go I imagine there are a few sub-types that don't quite have an AD&D counterpart, but AFAIK Thoul and Living Statue are a bit more iconic. Also in Expert we have the Caecilia, the Rhagodessa, and the Sea Dragon. In BECMI, there were the Gem Dragons, and probably others I can't recall.

I think I faced a blue dragon at the end of the first dungeon I played as a beginning Basic player. My memory is that it killed my PCs! I agree with you that there was a degree of mis-match between some of the monsters, and the PC power levels. If that was meant to suggest non-combat alternatives to resolution, I think it would hav been helpful to have a bit more designer commentary/guidance on that.

It's one of the drawbacks to Moldvaian Succinctness. There's a bit of DM advice there; he urges DM's not to throw full dragons at the Basic-level players. But nothing for the player. Certainly nothing like Gygax's in-depth section in the AD&D PHB. I'm not exactly sure why. To save space? To provide players with the freedom to figure things out for themselves? It's also, IMO, one of the few failings of the ruleset in that the examples of play only ever show the players using combat to resolve encounters. For the Example of Combat, sure. But the Example of Play opens with the end of one combat and ends with the beginning of another. Between that there's one example of the players retreating from approaching monsters, but there's nothing representing a non-combat method of engaging in encounters.

On number appearing - I think we'll see this revisited when we get to the DMing chapter. The figures in the monster chapter en up, I think, mostly being used to determine how much treasure the monsters should have when encountered in a dungeon.

It's very much a function of level, and the effect on treasure is, I think, more of a by-product. Similar to what 5e does (but with less transperancy as to design calculations, if any), difficulty is very much determined by No. Appearing. If you have a Level 1 monster, and you encounter it on Level 2, you encounter more of it. Likewise, if you meet a Level 5 monster on Level 3, you meet fewer, or even just one. Treasure is then adjusted to account for the change in difficulty, in keeping with Moldvay's injunction for DM's to balance risk with reward.

On saving throws - do you know the beginning of the tradition of doppelgangers having such good saves?

I don't know why it's necessarily a thing in terms of the fiction! The B/X doppelganger is very similar to the OD&D doppelganger, which is also immune to charm and sleep and saves as a 10th level Fighter. I think it comes from early OD&D, and thus B/X, not having anything like Magic Resistance or Anti-Magic (apart from the highly limited 6th level spell Anti-Magic Shell). How do you emulate magic resistance? Blanket immunity to certain spells and jack up the Saves.
 

Alcamtar

Explorer
Moldvay was my first game, but it didn't have any dragons. The center page was missing in the book, maybe a loose staple or something, but it came out of the box like that. I did not notice and played happily without them, figured the dragons were in the Expert set. But I bought Expert and still no dragons!

The kids at school played AD&D in the library and used dragons a lot; I peeked at their monster manual to see what the breath weapon types were, and then used the stats in BX's dungeon monster tables for combat and stuff. Eventually I upgraded to AD&D, in part because I thought I had to buy the advanced game to get the dragon rules!

It wasn't until years later when I bought a used copy of Moldvay and it had the dragons in it, as well as a couple of other monsters I'd never seen before that were also on those pages. To this day I rarely use dragons, perhaps in part because they weren't part of my early experience.
 
Last edited:

D'karr

Adventurer
Moldvay was my first game, but it didn't have any dragons. The center page was missing in the book, maybe a loose staple or something, but it came out of the box like that. I did not notice and played happily without them, figured the dragons were in the Expert set. But I bought Expert and still no dragons!

The kids at school played AD&D in the library and used dragons a lot; I peeked at their monster manual to see what the breath weapon types were, and then used the stats in BX's dungeon monster tables for combat and stuff. Eventually I upgraded to AD&D, in part because I thought I had to buy the advanced game to get the dragon rules!

It wasn't until years later when I bought a used copy of Moldvay and it had the dragons in it, as well as a couple of other monsters I'd never seen before that were also on those pages. To this day I rarely use dragons, perhaps in part because they weren't part of my early experience.

That is hilarious. I love the Moldvay set, I got my start with that one too. However, I would have been so disappointed if it didn't have dragons, particularly after the very inspirational foreword. You would have missed out on one of my other favorite monsters too, the carrion crawler.
 
Last edited:

Greyline

First Post
Great thread!

This is a great thread! Iosue, you do a wonderful job capturing the items the "magenta box" does well and not-so-well.

One question for you: Do you think folks' willingness to play fast and loose with the rules is a feature of the game, or a feature of the age folks were when they got the set?

I received the box set for my 8th birthday, and except for the very first time I played (with a teenage friend of the family and my dad), I don't believe there was one time in those first few heady years when my friends and I even picked up a die. Straight 18s? Yup, we got 'em. Your 1st-level fighter wrestled the tarrasque? Cool. My castle has a drawbridge made of solid platinum.

For me, opening that box brings back a wave of nostalgia. Both to the game itself, and the hours I spent thinking about it, and flipping through the rulebook with my childhood friends, and to child I was--who could imagine without needing to rationalize.
 

D'karr

Adventurer
One question for you: Do you think folks' willingness to play fast and loose with the rules is a feature of the game, or a feature of the age folks were when they got the set?

I think it's a bit of both. The Magenta Box set was very upfront about the rules being subservient to the fun at the table. The foreword contains one of the most succinct quotes to that effect - "The game has no rules, only rule suggestions. No rule is inviolate, particularly if a new or altered rule will encourage creativity and imagination."

So I think that the game was designed to be "broken" by the players whenever they wanted, and some of the rules really made it so that you had to "break" it to fix it to your taste.

Age is also a big factor in this. I see a willingness to break with the rules a lot more out of my younger players, than from my older players.
 

Iosue

Legend
This is a great thread! Iosue, you do a wonderful job capturing the items the "magenta box" does well and not-so-well.
Thank you! I do my best.

One question for you: Do you think folks' willingness to play fast and loose with the rules is a feature of the game, or a feature of the age folks were when they got the set?
Mostly the former, but certainly I think the latter plays a part. The game says up front that the rules are just guidelines, you should feel comfortable changing things if you want. I think kids are more apt to take that at face value, and have the time and boundless creativity to do that. Adults, OTOH, probably have more constraints on their time and mental bandwidth, and perhaps are more likely to play closer to the rules.

But one reason why I think Moldvay Basic in particular promotes that kind of willingness is that the rules footprint is very light, and almost entirely DM-sided. There aren't a whole lot of moving parts. As a player, you roll your stats and buy your equipment. Beyond that, your interaction with the mechanics of the game are very limited, essentially being rolling for initiative and making to-hit rolls. Maybe rolling for Open Locks and Climb Walls if you're a thief. (Probably also rolling for damage, although this technically isn't RAW.)

The rest of the rules in the book are essentially just heuristic structures to help the DM resolve things. The characters listen at a door? The DM can decide what they hear, or roll. The thief hides? The DM can decide he's well enough hidden, or roll. And so on. And most of these systems have to do with exploration, so virtually anything that didn't have to do with exploration depended on the DM to either adjudicate or create their own resolution system for. Further, while some bemoan old D&D's reliance on a number of different resolution systems, this actually gave DMs a toolkit of different kinds of resolutions: percentile dice, segmented percentage rolls (e.g., 2 in 6 chance), bell curves, etc. And Moldvay Basic also makes heavy use of the d6 as a "when in doubt" resolution system. So as you play you get a feel for how these different systems work, and then you can recycle them for your own systems if there's a rule you as DM want but the game doesn't provide.
 

Remove ads

Top