D&D General Why ya gotta be so Basic? Understanding the Resurgence of Moldvay's Basic

[Desdichado]

Ironically, Basic Fantasy RPG gets the snub here in the timeline, for some reason.

 

[Autumnal]

“The D&D game has neither losers nor winners, it has only gamers who relish exercising their imagination. The players and the DM share in creating adventures in fantastic lands where heroes abound and magic really works. In a sense, the D&D game has no rules, only rule suggestions. No rule is inviolate, particularly if a new or altered rule will encourage creativity and imagination. The important thing is to enjoy the adventure.”

Tom Moldvay
3 December 1980

I love games. Games are fun.
More people should play more games.
GAMES!!! WOOOOOOO!!!!!

these are my mantras for all gaming, from the most frivolous and gonzo adventure to the darkest, most horrific tragedy. Whatever it is, it should feel cool and and great and leave everyone wanting more sessions that good in whatever style they may be.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Ironically, Basic Fantasy RPG gets the snub here in the timeline, for some reason.

Not intentionally! This isn't a post about the many incredible retroclones and the amazing work and products that have come out of the OSR community.

But if I was going to detail that any more than just the absolute bare minimum, that would be ... a lot. I was just briefly mentioning them in a collateral way to discuss Moldvay's Basic.

 

[PHATsakk43]

Which then makes this the second time it actually shows up (thanks for the references)! I didn't have that particular DMGR book or I almost certainly would have taken note of it.

This whole discussion did get me curious, as I thought I remember ability checks being core in 2E.

Sure enough, it’s right there in the glossary at the very beginning of the PHB. The only reference to it, other than the one I initially mentioned about “Ability Checks as Saving Throws” is the proficiency section.

Specifically in the section prior to the introduction of the skills systems, called “Using What You Know” as an alternative to using any skill system in the game. It says that in an instance where the DM cannot assume the PC can simply accomplish something, an ability check can be used to adjudicate success, which is effectively B/X.

That said, I don’t think I can remember playing a 2E without proficiencies, as that was one of the reasons we switched from RC BECMI along with “race and class” character building.

 

[Mannahnin]

This whole discussion did get me curious, as I thought I remember ability checks being core in 2E.

Sure enough, it’s right there in the glossary at the very beginning of the PHB. The only reference to it, other than the one I initially mentioned about “Ability Checks as Saving Throws” is the proficiency section.

Right. 2E AD&D is where ability checks got regularized as an official rule, in the general case in that glossary (p 11). As opposed to more specific instances of proficiency checks, or the suggestion in the Dungeon Mastering as a Fine Art appendix on B60 of Moldvay.

 

[PHATsakk43]

Right. 2E AD&D is where ability checks got regularized as an official rule, in the general case in that glossary (p 11). As opposed to more specific instances of proficiency checks, or the suggestion in the Dungeon Mastering as a Fine Art appendix on B60 of Moldvay.

I don’t see any particular difference between what Zeb wrote in the 2E PHB and Moldvay’s work. Especially since it’s in the part where Zeb is describing how to deal with things without fixed rules.

 

[Mannahnin]

I don’t see any particular difference between what Zeb wrote in the 2E PHB and Moldvay’s work. Especially since it’s in the part where Zeb is describing how to deal with things without fixed rules.

No? The tone and placement are distinctly different.

In Moldvay it's a suggestion ("The DM may want to") presented in an appendix of advice at the back of the book.

In 2E it's a bare, factual description presented in the glossary of terms at the front of the book, alongside and presented at the same level as terms like "AC" or "attack roll".

 

[PHATsakk43]

No? The tone and placement are distinctly different.

In Moldvay it's a suggestion ("The DM may want to") presented in an appendix of advice at the back of the book.

In 2E it's a bare, factual description presented in the glossary of terms at the front of the book, alongside and presented at the same level as terms like "AC" or "attack roll".

The glossary is just to be a reference to what the term means.

Its utility is described in the proficiency chapter for campaigns that chose to not include skills whatsoever and as a way to adjudicate the more nebulous Secondary Skills.

 

[Mannahnin]

The glossary is just to be a reference to what the term means.

Its utility is described in the proficiency chapter for campaigns that chose to not include skills whatsoever and as a way to adjudicate the more nebulous Secondary Skills.

Could you quote the passage you're talking about?

In Chapter 5, "Proficiencies (Optional)" I'm seeing ability checks mentioned on page 54, suggested as one possible means to resolve use of Secondary Skills, alongside just assigning a percentage chance or asking for a saving throw. They get referenced again on page 66 of the DMG as one mechanic the DM may employ, under Ability Checks as Saving Throws.

But them getting a definition in the glossary, just like "saving throw", presupposes that ability checks are a standard and accepted mechanic. This is the real distinction between how they're treated in 2E as opposed to Moldvay. In 1981 they were an idea, probably one with some currency, but not universally known. By 1989 they were extremely common and part of the expected toolset for an AD&D player.

This is pretty hairsplitty, but I do see an evolution of their usage and expansion of their ubiquity.

 

[PHATsakk43]

I think we’ve been arguing separate points and are both representing our views correctly.

I also think I may have misunderstood what yours was. My mistake.

I agree with your statement then that Moldvay was not creating rules, but providing ideas for DMs to adjudicate success and failure where no rule is provided.

The only thing I will add is that the only “core mechanic” of where an ability check is described is in the saving throws section (and possibly in the wrestling section which I’m recalling as I write this.)