Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Clint_L" data-source="post: 8862150" data-attributes="member: 7035894">It's very much a niche game in 2022. And back then, most folks saw Basic as the kiddie version of AD&amp;D; I got mine from an aunt who heard I was into D&amp;D and picked it up at a toy store, which was lovely of her but the game was mostly an object of amusement for me and my AD&amp;D-playing cohort (I have the dice from it to this day). Basic was not originally written to be a dungeon crawler, it was written to be a simple version of the game targeted at younger players. Moldvay sort of adapted it to play more like original D&amp;D. Emphasis on sort of, as it was still being marketed as a beginner game.But citing Basic (and the Moldvay version in particular, which was already backward-looking in 1981) sort of illustrates what bothers me about a lot of these threads: the premise that the contemporary game is doing it wrong and needs to get back to where it started. Things evolve, and to me it makes no sense to try to go backwards when the game has become as incredibly successful as it has. I don't think anything should be added to the core rules to make the game more dungeon friendly because I think it is plenty dungeon friendly as is, and if you try to push it too hard towards that one old school style of play you start making it a niche game...which already exist. Including the Moldvay books, which are easily available.I can see adding a new dungeon setting like an Underdark source book, and including optional rules there for if players want to play it more like an old school dungeon crawler. But this is the OneD&amp;D sub-forum, and I think the emphasis in OneD&amp;D should be on looking forward, not back.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Clint_L, post: 8862150, member: 7035894"] It's very much a niche game in 2022. And back then, most folks saw Basic as the kiddie version of AD&D; I got mine from an aunt who heard I was into D&D and picked it up at a toy store, which was lovely of her but the game was mostly an object of amusement for me and my AD&D-playing cohort (I have the dice from it to this day). Basic was not originally written to be a dungeon crawler, it was written to be a simple version of the game targeted at younger players. Moldvay sort of adapted it to play more like original D&D. Emphasis on sort of, as it was still being marketed as a beginner game. But citing Basic (and the Moldvay version in particular, which was already backward-looking in 1981) sort of illustrates what bothers me about a lot of these threads: the premise that the contemporary game is doing it wrong and needs to get back to where it started. Things evolve, and to me it makes no sense to try to go backwards when the game has become as incredibly successful as it has. I don't think anything should be added to the core rules to make the game more dungeon friendly because I think it is plenty dungeon friendly as is, and if you try to push it too hard towards that one old school style of play you start making it a niche game...which already exist. Including the Moldvay books, which are easily available. I can see adding a new dungeon setting like an Underdark source book, and including optional rules there for if players want to play it more like an old school dungeon crawler. But this is the OneD&D sub-forum, and I think the emphasis in OneD&D should be on looking forward, not back. [/QUOTE]

Verification