ExploderWizard
Hero
The bard certainly would. The 1E bard was published in the PHB in 1978. The companion rules were released in 1984. The companion rules did pre-date the UA by a year.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E What can BECMI offer D&D Next?
- Thread starter Dungeonosophy
- Start date
The bard certainly would. The 1E bard was published in the PHB in 1978. The companion rules were released in 1984. The companion rules did pre-date the UA by a year.
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
And it rarely matters except to four or five OSR bloggers for whom the differences are the inspiration for all their posts. For everyone else, the editions are mostly interchangeable (with the obvious exception that one version had higher level boxed sets with new content). We don't need a "what can Holmes Basic offer D&D Next" thread and a separate "what can Moldvay Basic offer D&D Next" thread -- especially since those bloggers are already covering that ground quite nicely.
In any case, I think all of the suggestions offered by the OP have merit.
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
I missed that the Companion set predated UA by that much. Thst close proximity probably suggests a back and forth between designers during the creation process. (Did Gygax mention the Thief-Acrobat in Dragon before UA?)
ExploderWizard
Hero
The thief-acrobat first appeared in Dragon #69 in 1983. It wasn't an offical class until UA though.
Salamandyr
Adventurer
I don't think any edition of D&D is perfect, but in B/X/BECMI, I think it comes the closest. What I'd like D&DNext to take away...
-a focus on play at the table, rather than optimization beforehand.
-a number of simple resolution mechanics, rather than trying to do everything with one complicated one.
-lower power curve, and less of the tyranny of large numbers.
-ease and speed of play. I don't want to need to look up anything in game, if possible.
-a focus on play at the table, rather than optimization beforehand.
-a number of simple resolution mechanics, rather than trying to do everything with one complicated one.
-lower power curve, and less of the tyranny of large numbers.
-ease and speed of play. I don't want to need to look up anything in game, if possible.
Stormonu
Legend
What can Bd&D pffer D&D that has been lost pver the years?
A sense of whimsy. BD&D didn't take itself too seriously, and you could always find something either a bit bizarre (grab grass) or silly (Orcs of Thar Pcs). Things like Castle Amber had offbeat adventures, that while challenging, were a bit of a romp to play through. Everything since 3E has been so downright serious - minus the web adventure with the Calzone Golem.
A sense of whimsy. BD&D didn't take itself too seriously, and you could always find something either a bit bizarre (grab grass) or silly (Orcs of Thar Pcs). Things like Castle Amber had offbeat adventures, that while challenging, were a bit of a romp to play through. Everything since 3E has been so downright serious - minus the web adventure with the Calzone Golem.
Last edited:
Gargoyle
Adventurer
What I'd like D&D Next to take away from BECMI / BD&D:
The idea that you can start a campaign with minimal rules and options and increase your options slowly to the give the players and DM time to master the game as they go along.
BECMI defined itself by creating tiers of rules complexity, not just tiers of character levels. Basic, Expert, Companion, Master, and Immortal slowly added in more detail.
My thinking is that combat isn't slow in 3rd and 4th editions just because of the thousands of pages of rules or because of the grid, it's because of a lack of player and DM mastery of the rules. We have too many options too quickly, particularly in the DDI character builder.
I am willing to bet that no matter how streamlined the new rules set is, people trying it out for the first time will complain that it "runs slow" because they will try to incorporate too many rules at once. Even experienced players and DM's (and perhaps especially those folks) will do this.
Modules will not only hopefully allow this gradual learning curve, but will encourage it. The same goes for the raw number of classes, races, feats, etc. The volume of new material needs to be controlled so that we're not drinking from a fire hose.
The idea that you can start a campaign with minimal rules and options and increase your options slowly to the give the players and DM time to master the game as they go along.
BECMI defined itself by creating tiers of rules complexity, not just tiers of character levels. Basic, Expert, Companion, Master, and Immortal slowly added in more detail.
My thinking is that combat isn't slow in 3rd and 4th editions just because of the thousands of pages of rules or because of the grid, it's because of a lack of player and DM mastery of the rules. We have too many options too quickly, particularly in the DDI character builder.
I am willing to bet that no matter how streamlined the new rules set is, people trying it out for the first time will complain that it "runs slow" because they will try to incorporate too many rules at once. Even experienced players and DM's (and perhaps especially those folks) will do this.
Modules will not only hopefully allow this gradual learning curve, but will encourage it. The same goes for the raw number of classes, races, feats, etc. The volume of new material needs to be controlled so that we're not drinking from a fire hose.
CleverNickName
Limit Break Dancing (He/They)
One of my favorite things about the BECM/RC was the setting itself. I really liked Mystara...even the weird Hollow World stuff. The Gazetteers ruled, and the modules were splendid. If D&D Next brings back the Mystara setting, I will faint with joy.
I never cared for battle mats or the 5' grid, and BECM managed to make a fun, playable, tactical game without one. I hope D&D Next follows this fine example.
And the Isle of Dread. I friggin' LOVE that adventure.
I never cared for battle mats or the 5' grid, and BECM managed to make a fun, playable, tactical game without one. I hope D&D Next follows this fine example.
And the Isle of Dread. I friggin' LOVE that adventure.
Storminator
First Post
Speed of play. D&D needs a version that has a 15 minute gap between deciding to start a campaign and already playing. I'd love to have this table start rolling PCs, and that table setting up Axis & Allies, and have the D&D game start first.
PS
PS
1. A consistent design throughout all tiers. Even with any new rules, each tier played like the ones before, without extreme power creep (except the Immortals set, of course)
2. Roleplaying freedom - no "roles". If my fighter wants to be an archer and attack from a distance, he can. If my cleric wants to play a tank, he can.
3. Simplicity. The BECM rules were the easiest-to-learn-and-follow that I've ever seen (except maybe the old Marvel Superheroes game)
4. Options. The Gazetteers and other splatbooks added a Lot of great options without adding to the overall game complexity.
5. Artwork. Unlike some of my fellow grognards, I happen to like the Elmore art. It sure beats the grunge of 3.x, and the surrealism of 4e.
It wasn't perfect, but BECM remains my favorite D&D version by far.
2. Roleplaying freedom - no "roles". If my fighter wants to be an archer and attack from a distance, he can. If my cleric wants to play a tank, he can.
3. Simplicity. The BECM rules were the easiest-to-learn-and-follow that I've ever seen (except maybe the old Marvel Superheroes game)
4. Options. The Gazetteers and other splatbooks added a Lot of great options without adding to the overall game complexity.
5. Artwork. Unlike some of my fellow grognards, I happen to like the Elmore art. It sure beats the grunge of 3.x, and the surrealism of 4e.
It wasn't perfect, but BECM remains my favorite D&D version by far.
