One of the most interesting things about history is that you see things happen over and over again. The same styles that were in, go out, and come back in. Which is great for those of us who hate buying clothes, because we just have to wait long enough, and we are hip to the fashion of today! WOOT!
Anyway, history doesn't always repeat, but it usually rhymes. Like jistery. With that in mind, one thing I have been fascinated by is how Moldvay's Basic D&D went from a footnote in D&D's history to a popular resurgence with both OSR-types and with people that are into TTRPG theory. LL Cool J might be warning you - don't call it a comeback, but I'd argue that Moldvay is more prominent today than he has been at any other time in history, including when his Basic set was originally released. For that reason, I wanted to look back at Moldvay's Basic and try and understand a few things.
Why was Moldvay relatively ignored in the past? What accounts for the resurgence? Why do groups as disparate as OSR Lovers and Jargon-slingin' theorists all love them the Moldvay?
A. Why all Basic isn't the same. 10 Print "You Suck." 20 Goto 10.
My life is a constant battle between wanting to correct grammar and wanting friends.
I need to start by making sure we all understand some basic terms. Today, we just have "D&D" which is the "Fifth Edition" (or 5e:24 Day of the Soldado). But back in the TSR era, things were less clear. At the beginning, there were the 1974 rules (called the Little Brown Books, or LBBs) and the supplements, which collectively are called OD&D or original D&D. Or 0E (the Zero Edition). Later, TSR released a Monster Manual, Player's Handbook, and Dungeon Master's Guide for Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, and that is what we call AD&D or 1e. The OD&D -> 1e -> 2e etc. can be considered the "main branch" of D&D as it evolved.
But due to reasons (largely involving lawsuits), there was another branch of D&D that TSR put out. And this is where it gets confusing. This is the "Basic" branch. One of the reasons it is so confusing is that the first Basic D&D is not really part of the Basic line! Let me explain.
There was a project to streamline and simplify and explain OD&D that culminated in a set called Basic in 1977, written by Dr. John Eric Holmes. However, it also included information that referred to the Advanced D&D that was coming out to keep playing past the first three levels. So Holmes Basic is not really quite the same as the later Basic sets that came out; it lacks some of the defining features (such as "race as class"). Instead, it is more of an attempt to make OD&D comprehensible by rewriting and streamlining the core LBBs and first supplement- but it only has three levels, and told people to use AD&D for anything beyond that. Anyway, Holmes Basic is interesting and important, but not exactly "Basic" as we later get to know it.
1981 is when we get Moldvay's Basic (and Zeb Cook's Expert). You will often see this referred to as B/X. Like Holmes Basic, B/X was derived from OD&D, but B/X took more liberties to make it simpler and cleaner- such as "race as class." For those of you not familiar with the concept, you could play as a Dwarf, for example, but that would be your class. Unlike Holmes, B/X was now explicitly a different (albeit compatible) system than AD&D, and B/X provided rules for levels 1-3 (Moldvay Basic) and 4-14 (Cook Expert).
But B/X did not last long. In 1983, a new Basic was released- this is the Red Box Mentzer Basic that has rules that are largely unchanged from Moldvay, but includes the famous Bargle Gets Framed solo adventure. This is often referred to as BECMI as rules were later provided for play past level 36 to Immortal (Basic, Expert, Companion, Master, Immortal). The primary focus was to make the game more accessible to even younger players- those without the discernment to realize that Bargle was the good guy.
So when we are talking about Moldvay Basic, we are talking about the rules for Basic D&D by Moldvay for levels 1-3 that were published from 1981-83.
B. YA BASIC! Understanding Basic in the '80s.
Hyperbole: the greatest literary device in the history of the world!
I need to start by saying I am not taking an international perspective here- this is about 'Murikah. Internationally, Basic did very well and was translated and sold all over the place. However, even in the US, Benn Riggs provided data showing that Basic outsold AD&D throughout the '80s. But that data doesn't reflect the reality of play during that time. I went through this on a previous thread, but everything from personal anecdotes to looking at the play opportunities during conventions shows that AD&D was the dominant system for play. Even now, the vast majority of (boring) grognard stories are about AD&D, not Basic.
I am sure that there are many people who played and loved Basic- some of them comment here! But the overwhelming amount of play, the support, the modules and the supplements- they were AD&D. AD&D was "the main line" of D&D, and as we know, AD&D was 1e, that became 2e, that became 3e, etc. Basic was poorly supported, and died out in the '90s.
Further, there was often a snobbish attitude by players at the time around Basic. It's in the name! Basic ... that's for kids, right? ADVANCED D&D - that's what you should be playing. Simply put, a lot of people just thought that Basic was the little table where the kids were exiled; AD&D was where the adults had serious conversations.
And this is important, because it is part of why the resurrection of elevation of Moldvay is so fascinating today. A lot of people that don't follow this think to themselves, "Wait, isn't that ... for kids?" In other words, for a lot of gamers steeped in the gestalt of the 1980s ... when it comes to Moldvay and Basic....
C. 3e and the Retroclones.
The past, the present, and the future walked into a bar. It was tense.
It's common to think of "edition wars" as the battle over 4e here. But every edition change has caused an edition war. 4e to 5e? There are still people here griping about that. OD&D to 1e? How dare Gygax tell us how to play! 1e to 2e? What is this, for kids... they even got rid of demons! And, of course, a lot of people were unhappy about the the change from 2e to 3e. They wanted to keep playing the way they always played, that TSR made it; and with the release of the OGL, they formed a movement to clone the older systems so that they could ensure they could keep on playing their old games. Thus began the retroclone (and later, the OSR) movement.
Some of the first games used the simplified d20 mechanic while just trying to get the "feel" of the older games (such as Castles & Crusades). But in 2006, we saw the release of OSRIC, a retroclone of AD&D (1e). And then the next year ... Labyrinth Lord, a retroclone of B/X. These retroclones are marked by two notable things- first, alliteration. Second, and most importantly, they were the beginning of the OSR (Old School Renaissance) movement. There have been numerous retroclones made- one of the most popular today is Old School Essentials, which is (surprise!) a retroclone of Moldvay and B/X.
And that's the place we are at now; B/X (Moldvay Basic) was the source for both the first "Basic" retroclone as well as arguably the most well-known retroclone. But just as importantly, the OSR movement, as well as people who want to talk about design (and good design in TTRPGs) have re-discovered Moldvay and have elevated Moldvay's Basic into a position of prominence within the gaming sphere.
D. Moldvay as a Good System, Ahead of its Time?
What did the intransitive verb say when someone said it was pretty? Nothing – intransitive verbs can't take complements.
I think it is helpful to look back at Moldvay Basic, and understand why it was both slighted at the time, and now viewed so favorably. In 1981, real gamers were versed in the verbiage of Gygax, and complicated rules and tables. Most new TTRPGs during the '80s added complexity (reaching some absurd points, such as Phoenix Command) instead of looking at simplicity. Games that had simplicity were often viewed as "lesser" at the time, even if later people realized that the systems were actually good (FASERIP, Ghostbusters).
In this context, Moldvay's Basic could be seen as a "kiddie D&D" that didn't even separate race and class. Sixty-eight pages that only allowed you to get to level three? But viewed today, Moldvay did a number of things in those few pages that feel ... modern.
First, Moldvay limited the scope of the material. We see this in a lot of modern (non-D&D) design. Moldvay is largely teaching you how to play D&D, and is doing so in the context of dungeon crawls for starting characters. That tight focus (wilderness and hex crawls is covered in Cooks' Expert) lets Moldvay focus on explaining how the game works in a limited setting, and he explains it well using clear language.
Next, Moldvay has clear, concise, and specific rules for running adventures in dungeons, but also provides clear advice on how DMs should make rulings for things not covered by the rules.
Third, Moldvay avoids detailed subsystems and exceptions and tables for every possible scenario, but either has a clear rule or allows for DM adjudication. The game stress structures of play (procedures) as opposed to specific rules.
Fourth, Moldvay defines words and uses them if the words are unusual for someone who hasn't played an RPG before. Someone who hasn't played an RPG, let alone D&D, could begin play using this.
Fifth, the advice is aimed at creating an enjoyable and fair adventure for the players. The prior advice (such as in AD&D) could often be all over the place, or even suggest an adversarial relationship between DM and player.
Sixth, the book is organized as an introduction to the game, and makes sense as you read through it. Organization was not ... exactly a high priority for a lot of early RPGs.
Seventh, Moldvay explicitly allows characters to do anything. If there isn't a rule, the book has a provision that a d20 "check" against an appropriate ability score should be allowed (this was removed in Mentzer).
There are other factors, of course. But while you would never mistake Moldvay for a modern rule system, when you go back and read it, you can see the hints of modern design within it. Or, as I say now, in my youth, I loved AD&D and mocked B/X. In my dotage, I have grown to appreciate the elegance of Moldvay. Also? The Moldvay Thief wasn't great, but at least it was better than the Mentzer thief.
Finally, I should add that Zeb Cook also wrote an amazing Expert set. But I've written about Zeb, like a lot, so I wanted to give props to Moldvay today. Anyway, let me know what y'all are thinking about Moldvay.
Anyway, history doesn't always repeat, but it usually rhymes. Like jistery. With that in mind, one thing I have been fascinated by is how Moldvay's Basic D&D went from a footnote in D&D's history to a popular resurgence with both OSR-types and with people that are into TTRPG theory. LL Cool J might be warning you - don't call it a comeback, but I'd argue that Moldvay is more prominent today than he has been at any other time in history, including when his Basic set was originally released. For that reason, I wanted to look back at Moldvay's Basic and try and understand a few things.
Why was Moldvay relatively ignored in the past? What accounts for the resurgence? Why do groups as disparate as OSR Lovers and Jargon-slingin' theorists all love them the Moldvay?
A. Why all Basic isn't the same. 10 Print "You Suck." 20 Goto 10.
My life is a constant battle between wanting to correct grammar and wanting friends.
I need to start by making sure we all understand some basic terms. Today, we just have "D&D" which is the "Fifth Edition" (or 5e:24 Day of the Soldado). But back in the TSR era, things were less clear. At the beginning, there were the 1974 rules (called the Little Brown Books, or LBBs) and the supplements, which collectively are called OD&D or original D&D. Or 0E (the Zero Edition). Later, TSR released a Monster Manual, Player's Handbook, and Dungeon Master's Guide for Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, and that is what we call AD&D or 1e. The OD&D -> 1e -> 2e etc. can be considered the "main branch" of D&D as it evolved.
But due to reasons (largely involving lawsuits), there was another branch of D&D that TSR put out. And this is where it gets confusing. This is the "Basic" branch. One of the reasons it is so confusing is that the first Basic D&D is not really part of the Basic line! Let me explain.
There was a project to streamline and simplify and explain OD&D that culminated in a set called Basic in 1977, written by Dr. John Eric Holmes. However, it also included information that referred to the Advanced D&D that was coming out to keep playing past the first three levels. So Holmes Basic is not really quite the same as the later Basic sets that came out; it lacks some of the defining features (such as "race as class"). Instead, it is more of an attempt to make OD&D comprehensible by rewriting and streamlining the core LBBs and first supplement- but it only has three levels, and told people to use AD&D for anything beyond that. Anyway, Holmes Basic is interesting and important, but not exactly "Basic" as we later get to know it.
1981 is when we get Moldvay's Basic (and Zeb Cook's Expert). You will often see this referred to as B/X. Like Holmes Basic, B/X was derived from OD&D, but B/X took more liberties to make it simpler and cleaner- such as "race as class." For those of you not familiar with the concept, you could play as a Dwarf, for example, but that would be your class. Unlike Holmes, B/X was now explicitly a different (albeit compatible) system than AD&D, and B/X provided rules for levels 1-3 (Moldvay Basic) and 4-14 (Cook Expert).
But B/X did not last long. In 1983, a new Basic was released- this is the Red Box Mentzer Basic that has rules that are largely unchanged from Moldvay, but includes the famous Bargle Gets Framed solo adventure. This is often referred to as BECMI as rules were later provided for play past level 36 to Immortal (Basic, Expert, Companion, Master, Immortal). The primary focus was to make the game more accessible to even younger players- those without the discernment to realize that Bargle was the good guy.
So when we are talking about Moldvay Basic, we are talking about the rules for Basic D&D by Moldvay for levels 1-3 that were published from 1981-83.
B. YA BASIC! Understanding Basic in the '80s.
Hyperbole: the greatest literary device in the history of the world!
I need to start by saying I am not taking an international perspective here- this is about 'Murikah. Internationally, Basic did very well and was translated and sold all over the place. However, even in the US, Benn Riggs provided data showing that Basic outsold AD&D throughout the '80s. But that data doesn't reflect the reality of play during that time. I went through this on a previous thread, but everything from personal anecdotes to looking at the play opportunities during conventions shows that AD&D was the dominant system for play. Even now, the vast majority of (boring) grognard stories are about AD&D, not Basic.
I am sure that there are many people who played and loved Basic- some of them comment here! But the overwhelming amount of play, the support, the modules and the supplements- they were AD&D. AD&D was "the main line" of D&D, and as we know, AD&D was 1e, that became 2e, that became 3e, etc. Basic was poorly supported, and died out in the '90s.
Further, there was often a snobbish attitude by players at the time around Basic. It's in the name! Basic ... that's for kids, right? ADVANCED D&D - that's what you should be playing. Simply put, a lot of people just thought that Basic was the little table where the kids were exiled; AD&D was where the adults had serious conversations.
And this is important, because it is part of why the resurrection of elevation of Moldvay is so fascinating today. A lot of people that don't follow this think to themselves, "Wait, isn't that ... for kids?" In other words, for a lot of gamers steeped in the gestalt of the 1980s ... when it comes to Moldvay and Basic....
C. 3e and the Retroclones.
The past, the present, and the future walked into a bar. It was tense.
It's common to think of "edition wars" as the battle over 4e here. But every edition change has caused an edition war. 4e to 5e? There are still people here griping about that. OD&D to 1e? How dare Gygax tell us how to play! 1e to 2e? What is this, for kids... they even got rid of demons! And, of course, a lot of people were unhappy about the the change from 2e to 3e. They wanted to keep playing the way they always played, that TSR made it; and with the release of the OGL, they formed a movement to clone the older systems so that they could ensure they could keep on playing their old games. Thus began the retroclone (and later, the OSR) movement.
Some of the first games used the simplified d20 mechanic while just trying to get the "feel" of the older games (such as Castles & Crusades). But in 2006, we saw the release of OSRIC, a retroclone of AD&D (1e). And then the next year ... Labyrinth Lord, a retroclone of B/X. These retroclones are marked by two notable things- first, alliteration. Second, and most importantly, they were the beginning of the OSR (Old School Renaissance) movement. There have been numerous retroclones made- one of the most popular today is Old School Essentials, which is (surprise!) a retroclone of Moldvay and B/X.
And that's the place we are at now; B/X (Moldvay Basic) was the source for both the first "Basic" retroclone as well as arguably the most well-known retroclone. But just as importantly, the OSR movement, as well as people who want to talk about design (and good design in TTRPGs) have re-discovered Moldvay and have elevated Moldvay's Basic into a position of prominence within the gaming sphere.
D. Moldvay as a Good System, Ahead of its Time?
What did the intransitive verb say when someone said it was pretty? Nothing – intransitive verbs can't take complements.
I think it is helpful to look back at Moldvay Basic, and understand why it was both slighted at the time, and now viewed so favorably. In 1981, real gamers were versed in the verbiage of Gygax, and complicated rules and tables. Most new TTRPGs during the '80s added complexity (reaching some absurd points, such as Phoenix Command) instead of looking at simplicity. Games that had simplicity were often viewed as "lesser" at the time, even if later people realized that the systems were actually good (FASERIP, Ghostbusters).
In this context, Moldvay's Basic could be seen as a "kiddie D&D" that didn't even separate race and class. Sixty-eight pages that only allowed you to get to level three? But viewed today, Moldvay did a number of things in those few pages that feel ... modern.
First, Moldvay limited the scope of the material. We see this in a lot of modern (non-D&D) design. Moldvay is largely teaching you how to play D&D, and is doing so in the context of dungeon crawls for starting characters. That tight focus (wilderness and hex crawls is covered in Cooks' Expert) lets Moldvay focus on explaining how the game works in a limited setting, and he explains it well using clear language.
Next, Moldvay has clear, concise, and specific rules for running adventures in dungeons, but also provides clear advice on how DMs should make rulings for things not covered by the rules.
Third, Moldvay avoids detailed subsystems and exceptions and tables for every possible scenario, but either has a clear rule or allows for DM adjudication. The game stress structures of play (procedures) as opposed to specific rules.
Fourth, Moldvay defines words and uses them if the words are unusual for someone who hasn't played an RPG before. Someone who hasn't played an RPG, let alone D&D, could begin play using this.
Fifth, the advice is aimed at creating an enjoyable and fair adventure for the players. The prior advice (such as in AD&D) could often be all over the place, or even suggest an adversarial relationship between DM and player.
Sixth, the book is organized as an introduction to the game, and makes sense as you read through it. Organization was not ... exactly a high priority for a lot of early RPGs.
Seventh, Moldvay explicitly allows characters to do anything. If there isn't a rule, the book has a provision that a d20 "check" against an appropriate ability score should be allowed (this was removed in Mentzer).
There are other factors, of course. But while you would never mistake Moldvay for a modern rule system, when you go back and read it, you can see the hints of modern design within it. Or, as I say now, in my youth, I loved AD&D and mocked B/X. In my dotage, I have grown to appreciate the elegance of Moldvay. Also? The Moldvay Thief wasn't great, but at least it was better than the Mentzer thief.
Finally, I should add that Zeb Cook also wrote an amazing Expert set. But I've written about Zeb, like a lot, so I wanted to give props to Moldvay today. Anyway, let me know what y'all are thinking about Moldvay.
