OD&D or RC?

[Delta]

It's funny how well-regarded the RC mass warfare rules are. When I used them in practice (like running module X10) I found them very poor in actual play. The premise is great, but the way points are added up for armies totally doesn't simulate how actual D&D fighting occurs. The disconnect was too much for me to deal with. (And same for the dominion rules when I used those as written back in the day.) So for me, those are actually negative points to the RC.

 

[tankschmidt]

I can't remember where but T. Foster might know where to find the threads about discussions of the original campaigns, i.e., Blackmoor and Greyhawk. This practice was very common, and might be yet another reason to choose the original set, (since what I posted before about the smaller gap between PCs of different levels isn't so great.

If you do go with OD&D, lets us know. We have a lot of links for you to check out.

Here's a link to Greg Svenson's page. He played in Dave Arneson's original game and has some neat stories there. http://home.tampabay.rr.com/gsvenson/svenny.html

 

[diaglo]

Use OD&D as your base rules-set and pick portions of RC as needed (mass-combat for example )

if you are using OD&D you don't need RC for mass combat.

Chainmail (1971) is already being used.

 

[Zulgyan]

That's true. Wrote that in a hurry

You can use RC if you don't have OUTDOOR SURVIVAL for wilderness exploration, etc...

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I like both, but I prefer OD&D's style, tone, brevity, and toolkit approach. Since you've already said you're going to taking a "scissors and glue" approach, I'd definitely recommend OD&D.

 

[T. Foster]

The method of early campaigns (and the default assumption of the OD&D rules) is definitely that there's a large and fluid player-base, with a few dedicated/hard-core players and a larger periphery or more casual, less skilled, or less active players (e.g. someone who lives out of town or has a demanding job and only gets to play occasionally). The recommendation of up to 50 players per campaign doesn't mean 50 people gathered around the table all at once, it means that many total players with characters active in the campaign, likely actually playing together in various sub-groups of from 1 up to a dozen or so (though in Greyhawk they occasionally had groups of 20+ players with Gary and Rob Kuntz co-DMing).

It's implicit in this model that the more active and more skilled players will outpace the others level-wise, and this isn't a problem because OD&D works fine with mixed-level groups -- characters as much as 5-6 levels apart can adventure in the same party (though they should obviously seek out challenges appropriate to the midpoint between the two -- i.e. if you've got a group made up of a 10th level character, a 7th level character, 2 5th level characters, and 2 4th level characters, the group should be seeking out challenges around 6th level rather than 4th level or 10th level ones).

The same could probably be done in an RC-based campaign as well, but the default assumption there isn't that sort of campaign, but rather the model that became the standard sometime around the early 80s and has remained so to this day -- a fixed/stable group of 4-8 players/characters that will start out together at 1st level and generally stick together for the entire campaign. The RC even (IIRC) gives advice for how many sessions it should take the party to level and how much XP the DM should give out per adventure to match that pace, etc., which would've been completely unheard of in the OD&D assumed model.

 

[SuStel]

OD&D & some scissors and glue)

Buy the D&D PDFs, print them out as booklets, then feel free to pencil in any changes. (Why look! The books themselves tell you to pencil in changes!)

 

[Ry]

I really appreciate everybody's responses in this thread - I have a really clear idea of what to expect from each and what would work with my house rules best. Sadly, since my players will frequently be GMing the game and they're not so good about reading all the rules, the Cyclopedia lost out.

After some consideration, and discussing with my players it looks like I'll be doing something in the spirit of OD&D but not copying it. I want to be able to share it later as OGC, so OD&D is the inspiration but not the game. We'll be tying very closely to the concept of the character's subtitle ("5th level Dwarven Warrior") the 6 stats, and the character's description being all you need.

 

[w_earle_wheeler]

Check out this OD&D discussion forum if you haven't already:
http://odd74.proboards76.com/index.cgi

It seems to have the most activity, especially for a OD&D (not Basic/Expert-BECMI-Rules Compendium) focus.

 

[Blackwind]

Please keep us updated on how this goes. It sounds awesome.