* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : The many faces of OD&D - help! Started at 07-13-04 12:17 PM by IronCat Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=275132 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : IronCat Date : 07-13-04 12:17 PM Thread Title : The many faces of OD&D - help! I've been on an AD&D shopping spree as a collector of late, and somehow it's steered be to OD&D as player (I like the simplicity). I've downloaded the Basic Set (Red Box), and Cyclopedia. Now I'm stuck trying to figure out what's what with the various editons. I've also decided to get the real sets off Ebay. From these boards I gather the rules Cyclopedia is the way to go, but isn't the best if you don't already know the rules. Despite having bought various sets through the years, I've never played the game. The first set of rules I ever bought were the old Basic and Expert sets with the Otus covers. I'm going to get them again for olds times sake, and was wondering if I could then transition from them to Cylopedia, or if the newer sets were better. There seems to have been a bunch of sets put out in the last years of OD&D - which one is best? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : rogueattorney Date : 07-13-04 01:24 PM The history of D&D (non-A, pre 3e) is roughly as follows: 1974-76: The orginal box (OD&D) plus the first four Supplements produced 1977: Concurrent with the introduction of 1e, the first Basic Set was produced, intended as an introduction to both 1e and OD&D. It was edited by Holmes, with cover art by Sutherland. 1979: Publishing of the original D&D set and Supplements is discontinued. 1981: The Erol Otus covered boxes put out, Basic set edited by Moldvay, Expert set edited by Cook and Marsh. 1983: The Larry Elmore covered Basic and Expert boxes come out, edited by Frank Mentzer. 1984: The Companion set 1985: The Master set 1986: The Immortals set 1987-1991: The Gazetteer series expands the D&D game world and the D&D rules 1991: The Rules Cyclopedia and "New Easy to Master Dungeons & Dragons Game" (Black Box) released. Products are either in the "Challenger" series and intended for use with the RC and set in Mystara (formerly the Known World), or are in the "Beginners" series and intended for use with the Black box and set in the new Thunder Rift setting. 1992: Immortal set updated as Wrath of the Immortals 1993: TSR ends all support of D&D, Thunder Rift discontinued, all subsequent Mystara products are made for 2e. 1994-96: Box sets with near identical content to 1991 Black Box produced - no other D&D products appear. 1999: Dungeons & Dragons Adventure Game that went with "Fast Play" products. To answer your question, the Rules Cyclopedia is really a compilation of the 1983-85 Mentzer edited box sets with a few additions from the Gazetteers. There are some minor differences with the rules from the Otus covered boxes, particularly at mid- to higher levels, say 6th lvl plus. I personally prefer the Moldvay/Cook rules to the Mentzer rules. I think they're better written. However, I use the RC as a reference all the time. Of the box sets put out concurrently with the RC and later, the ones from 91-96 can properly be said to be OD&D. They are a starter game for characters up to 5th level. Unfortunately, they are editing disasters and are written in a somewhat condescending "for the kiddies" manner. The 1999 box set is more of an introduction to 2e and probably shouldn't be considered OD&D. To sum up - Pretty much anything made for D&D from 1981 to 1993 can be used together, with little or no problems. The OD&D stuff made in the 70's can be converted with very little difficulty (it's closer to BD&D than 1e is). The stuff from after 1993 is crap. R.A. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : diaglo Date : 07-13-04 01:29 PM Basic is not OD&D. OD&D is Original D&D. 3 booklets... Men & Magic, Monsters & Treasure, and The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures...it came in a boxed set. with reference sheets. they are used in conjuntion with Chainmail by Perren & Gygax. and the Outdoor Survival board game from Avalon hill. there were 4 main supplements. Greyhawk, Blackmoor, Eldritch Wizardry, and Gods, Demigods, & Heroes.. also a supplement to Chainmail... Sword & Spells. OD&D was first available as handcopied notes only to those in Gygax's or Arneson's campaigns. Later they were put into the boxed sets and published in 1974. Basic came afterwards. late 1977 and thru 1978... this was 2edD&D. it came as a boxed set with Dungeon Geomorphs set one and Monster & Treasure Assortment set one. around the same time Advanced DnD was being released with the Monster Manual. what is commonly referred to as 1edADnD. edit: and now rogueattorney beat me to it. man i type slow. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : diaglo Date : 07-13-04 01:38 PM just one disagreement with rogueattorney... 3edD&D was the Holmes set too. iirc, it was the introduction of B2 as the free module that tipped the edge of the edition. so for me Moldvay set has always been 4edD&D -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : IronCat Date : 07-13-04 02:46 PM Thanks for the info. I'm gonna go with Moldvay, which sadly doesn't seem to be downloadable anywhere. One day I'm gonna have to get the 4 Elmore covered sets, as they will look cool on a bookshelf. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : rogueattorney Date : 07-13-04 04:30 PM Re: Diaglo's post OD&D has taken on two different meanings. Most properly, it's the 1974 box set and its Supplements, the 'O' standing for "original" from the "Original Collector's Edition" that appeared on the box of the last few printings. Less specifically, it refers to all versions of D&D that are neither advanced nor 3e. The problem lies in the fact that there really is no good term for the version of the game that was produced from 1981-1993 (more on the '77-'79 Holmes box in a second). As mentioned, 'OD&D' already has a specific meaning for a different set of products. The games are quite similar. I use the products interchangeably, but like 1e and 2e, there are significant differences. 'BD&D' is also not quite proper. "Basic" really only refers to those rules for levels 1-3. Calling "Basic" the D&D being played with 15th level Paladins fighting Beholders and Liches according to the RC rules really doesn't seem to do things justice. Of course, prior to 2000, we could just call the game by its actual name, "Dungeons & Dragons". But since then, some new game's come along with screwy stuff like BAB's, AoA's, "sorcerers" and the like, that also calls itself Dungeons & Dragons. For some odd reason, it's become really popular, and when you say "D&D" that's what people think you're talking about. Thus what to call the game? We've gone all over the place with this on the Dragonsfoot Classic D&D board. The "Classic D&D" term comes from the 1994-96 boxes, and it's probably the most proper term as it's the one that TSR used toward the end of the game's life. However, it isn't used much, and people don't know what you're talking about when you do use it. Personally, I like B/X D&D for the Moldvay/Cook rules and BECM D&D for the Mentzer/RC rules. Those terms at least tell everybody what you're talking about. About the Holmes box: It's really a rules oddity. It was published concurrently with both OD&D and the introduction of AD&D. It's sort of at the mid-point between the OD&D box plus the Greyhawk Supplement and the Moldvay Basic box. However it has some other anomolous rules that aren't in either the preceding or supsequent sets (Dex based initiative and the 5-prong alignment to name two). The magic-user spell list has spells from 1e that neither appeared in OD&D nor later versions of D&D. Diaglo doesn't think it's OD&D, and I think it's closer to OD&D than the Moldvay set. Obviously, neither of us want to claim it as part of our favorite version of the game :D . I've heard others claim it is more 1e than (O)D&D, but I don't believe this bears out when comparing the rules (hit dice, XP charts, Saving Throws, and other items are closer to both OD&D and the Moldvay set than 1e). The point I'm making is that the Holmes set is sort of its own odd little entity that doesn't really fit with much of anything else. The Cook version of the Expert set does have a section on the changes in the rules between the Holmes set and the Moldvay set, and was clearly intended to be used with the Holmes set. (The Cook Expert set was actually published a couple months before the Moldvay Basic set and I've always thought the duplication of much of the Moldvay combat section was for the benefit of those using the Cook set with the Holmes set.) So maybe the best place to put it is with B/X D&D. R.A. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : blackprinceofmuncie Date : 07-13-04 04:53 PM Originally posted by IronCat Thanks for the info. I'm gonna go with Moldvay, which sadly doesn't seem to be downloadable anywhere. Good choice! Also, you have a PM. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : RobertFisher Date : 07-13-04 05:19 PM Originally posted by IronCat Thanks for the info. I'm gonna go with Moldvay... Bwahaha! Moldvay/Cook will conquer the roleplaying world! :) Originally posted by IronCat ...which sadly doesn't seem to be downloadable anywhere. Dang, I need to get on the ball with the letter writing. I keep forgetting about it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : blackprinceofmuncie Date : 07-13-04 07:42 PM Originally posted by RobertFisher Bwahaha! Moldvay/Cook will conquer the roleplaying world! :) When comes the revolution, all who know the secret phrase ("Gary sent us") will be spared. All others shall perish in lakes of flame. Dang, I need to get on the ball with the letter writing. I keep forgetting about it. The Moldvay Underground has already got you covered! ;) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:16 AM.