Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="radferth" data-source="post: 4512145" data-attributes="member: 5791">Having read, downloaded, or even played most of the clones being discussed here, and being bored at work today, I figured I would briefly give my thoughts on each (all of the following are IMnsHO, YMMV, etc.):Castles &amp; Crusades: Love, love, love it. But yeah, all of Irda's criticisms are totally valid.&nbsp; It's basically a cleaned up AD&amp;D with some of bits I like from 3rd ed. thrown in.&nbsp; (I guess Davis and I like much of the save stuff.)&nbsp; Owning AD&amp;D and 3rd ed., I could have easily done this myself, but I am very happy to have it in nice, thinnish, hard-bound book.&nbsp; I enjoy their monster book (particularly their stand-ins for traditional, yet non-SRD monsters), but it's totally not needed if you have any older edition monster books lying around.Labyrinth Lord:&nbsp; This one strikes me as being closest to Basic/Expert D&amp;D, with its separate, level-capped classes for demi-humans and d8-for-fighter-based&nbsp; HD system.&nbsp; Seems designed to scale up to 14th level.&nbsp; Haven't played it, seems solid-enough, only minor differences from its source material.&nbsp; Basic Fantasy RPG:&nbsp; Still based off Basic/Expert, but with more stuff from other editions.&nbsp; Class and race are separate, and classes scale up to 20th level.&nbsp; Seems to have more campaign-related info than Labyrinth Lord.All three systems use the Basic/Expert ability score modifiers (upto +/- 3, 9-12 is no bonus).&nbsp; The latter two use traditional effect-based saves (e.g. poison, breath weapon, spells, etc.) while C&amp;C uses its own ability-based system.&nbsp; (Kind of like if 3rd ed. had 6 categories instead of 3).Swords &amp; Wizardry: just now heard of it.&nbsp; Lets see if I can get their from work.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="radferth, post: 4512145, member: 5791"] Having read, downloaded, or even played most of the clones being discussed here, and being bored at work today, I figured I would briefly give my thoughts on each (all of the following are IMnsHO, YMMV, etc.): Castles & Crusades: Love, love, love it. But yeah, all of Irda's criticisms are totally valid. It's basically a cleaned up AD&D with some of bits I like from 3rd ed. thrown in. (I guess Davis and I like much of the save stuff.) Owning AD&D and 3rd ed., I could have easily done this myself, but I am very happy to have it in nice, thinnish, hard-bound book. I enjoy their monster book (particularly their stand-ins for traditional, yet non-SRD monsters), but it's totally not needed if you have any older edition monster books lying around. Labyrinth Lord: This one strikes me as being closest to Basic/Expert D&D, with its separate, level-capped classes for demi-humans and d8-for-fighter-based HD system. Seems designed to scale up to 14th level. Haven't played it, seems solid-enough, only minor differences from its source material. Basic Fantasy RPG: Still based off Basic/Expert, but with more stuff from other editions. Class and race are separate, and classes scale up to 20th level. Seems to have more campaign-related info than Labyrinth Lord. All three systems use the Basic/Expert ability score modifiers (upto +/- 3, 9-12 is no bonus). The latter two use traditional effect-based saves (e.g. poison, breath weapon, spells, etc.) while C&C uses its own ability-based system. (Kind of like if 3rd ed. had 6 categories instead of 3). Swords & Wizardry: just now heard of it. Lets see if I can get their from work. [/QUOTE]

Verification