Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Veteran fans - did you think of Basic D&D and AD&D as completely different games?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Volund" data-source="post: 8560629" data-attributes="member: 6872597"><p>Answer depends on what you think of as Basic D&D. For me and the people I played Holmes Basic with in the late 1970's they were both the same game. In 1978, you could buy the Holmes basic set and the AD&D PHB, but the DMG hadn't been published. I didn't even know about OD&D so the only rules we had for actually playing the game were in the basic set. We started with Basic and converted our characters to AD&D once we had a PHB, which is what the basic rules said we should do anyway. The basic set was clearly presented as an introduction to AD&D in the same way LMoP is an introduction to 5e. Slimmed down rules and limited character classes that you used until you could get the complete rules. Even the the covers of the introductory modules B1 and B2 said they could be played with AD&D. After playing through levels 1-3 with B1 or B2 there wasn't anything else you could do except continue with AD&D. But the basic set had higher level monsters, so I kept using it as my MM even after we switched to AD&D. It wasn't easy for a kid to find polyhedral dice back then so I'm sure a lot of people who wanted to play AD&D bought the basic set for the dice and an adventure. (My friend who bought the basic set during the dice shortage when it came with cardboard chits was so pissed!) </p><p>Even when the revised basic set came out in 1981 it didn't seem sufficiently different that we thought it was a distinct rule system. We looked at it as an introduction to AD&D that still retained some of the features from Holmes like race-as-class and different hit dice. My recollection from that time (1978-1982) was that there was not the clear separation between AD&D and Basic products that they had later on. Chainmail, OD&D and it's supplements, AD&D, Basic, and officially licensed Judges Guild material were all displayed side by side in my local hobby shop. The rapid growth of TSR led to constantly evolving trade dress and artistic styles. Different book sizes, changing logos, monochrome gave way to color covers, module text styles changed. Some of this mishmash was labeled as AD&D but a lot was not. Regardless, collectively it was all D&D and we used it interchangeably. Even within the AD&D line there was not a consistent presentation between modules, so the fact that a B/X module had different NPC stats or monsters wasn't notable. All of the products from that time had their own quirks. There was more of a difference between 1978 and 1981 AD&D modules than there was between AD&D and B modules from 1982.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Volund, post: 8560629, member: 6872597"] Answer depends on what you think of as Basic D&D. For me and the people I played Holmes Basic with in the late 1970's they were both the same game. In 1978, you could buy the Holmes basic set and the AD&D PHB, but the DMG hadn't been published. I didn't even know about OD&D so the only rules we had for actually playing the game were in the basic set. We started with Basic and converted our characters to AD&D once we had a PHB, which is what the basic rules said we should do anyway. The basic set was clearly presented as an introduction to AD&D in the same way LMoP is an introduction to 5e. Slimmed down rules and limited character classes that you used until you could get the complete rules. Even the the covers of the introductory modules B1 and B2 said they could be played with AD&D. After playing through levels 1-3 with B1 or B2 there wasn't anything else you could do except continue with AD&D. But the basic set had higher level monsters, so I kept using it as my MM even after we switched to AD&D. It wasn't easy for a kid to find polyhedral dice back then so I'm sure a lot of people who wanted to play AD&D bought the basic set for the dice and an adventure. (My friend who bought the basic set during the dice shortage when it came with cardboard chits was so pissed!) Even when the revised basic set came out in 1981 it didn't seem sufficiently different that we thought it was a distinct rule system. We looked at it as an introduction to AD&D that still retained some of the features from Holmes like race-as-class and different hit dice. My recollection from that time (1978-1982) was that there was not the clear separation between AD&D and Basic products that they had later on. Chainmail, OD&D and it's supplements, AD&D, Basic, and officially licensed Judges Guild material were all displayed side by side in my local hobby shop. The rapid growth of TSR led to constantly evolving trade dress and artistic styles. Different book sizes, changing logos, monochrome gave way to color covers, module text styles changed. Some of this mishmash was labeled as AD&D but a lot was not. Regardless, collectively it was all D&D and we used it interchangeably. Even within the AD&D line there was not a consistent presentation between modules, so the fact that a B/X module had different NPC stats or monsters wasn't notable. All of the products from that time had their own quirks. There was more of a difference between 1978 and 1981 AD&D modules than there was between AD&D and B modules from 1982. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Veteran fans - did you think of Basic D&D and AD&D as completely different games?
Top