D&D Basic\Expert (1e), Myth Weavers, & House Rules

[The_TFT_DM]

Hello everyone! I happen to be toying around with the idea of running a game using the old 1st edition D&D Basic\Expert rules from good old Moldvay... I'm using the character sheet template to write out sheets for pre-gens from a old module... the only trouble is, I can't seem to get the AC field to fill out!? Anyone else encounter this?

 

I must say Moldavay is such a breath of fresh air compared to so many of the contemporary (1980s) D&D and other RPG writers' rule books. Finally something decently organized and easy to understand! Don't get me wrong I love 1st Ed. AD&D, I happen to own the PHB & DM Guides, but man is it dense and hard to grock at times. And Gary had a very adversarial relationship with his players that... well maybe it made sense for his table, full of rules lawyer wargamers but it sure didn't seem very fun for me.

 

I'd also be interested in any house rules you guys use with Moldvay... I'm tempted to add a few from Holmes for flavor or because they just seem better. I quite liked the idea of giving daggers two attacks per round, having initiative done with dex, and the five point alignment system (which seems like it's a good middle ground between the overly simplistic good-neutral-evil of Moldvay and the 9 point system we are familiar with but which also seems like it causes a lot of debate) from Holmes,

[Eric]

9 hours ago, The_TFT_DM said:

I happen to be toying around with the idea of running a game using the old 1st edition D&D Basic\Expert rules from good old Moldvay... I'm using the character sheet template to write out sheets for pre-gens from a old module... the only trouble is, I can't seem to get the AC field to fill out!? Anyone else encounter this?

I have not run into this, but if you can link the sheet where you're having trouble, I'll take a look.

Also, great to see more love for Basic D&D. Currently running the starter adventure and about to start up X1 😀

[The_TFT_DM]

Ah yes... dunno why I didn't think of that?

 

https://www.myth-weavers.com/sheets/?id=2906348

 

This should be the sheet. These characters are pre-gens from AC-3, which I'd like to run for some friends. I'm actually think about getting the 3D Dungeon from that module printed out (I have the pdf) on card stock...

 

Anyways, technically, they'd be "expert" characters since they are all over level 3, but it's still the D&D Basic system. I own the AD&D books and once played Keep on the Borderlands. Very sadly, that DM passed away, so I stopped playing it around that time... always intended to run a game but man I struggle sometimes to grock AD&D... or Pathfinder for that matter. I tend to run more rules light, D6 based indy games... but sometimes though require alot of work to get to something you can play.

[Eric]

Holy layout error, Batman!

The fields on that row are showing up to the right of their labels, rather than above. I'll put it on the to-do list for this weekend.

[Excior]

On 5/14/2024 at 9:10 PM, The_TFT_DM said:

Hello everyone! I happen to be toying around with the idea of running a game using the old 1st edition D&D Basic\Expert rules from good old Moldvay... I'm using the character sheet template to write out sheets for pre-gens from a old module... the only trouble is, I can't seem to get the AC field to fill out!? Anyone else encounter this?

 

I must say Moldavay is such a breath of fresh air compared to so many of the contemporary (1980s) D&D and other RPG writers' rule books. Finally something decently organized and easy to understand! Don't get me wrong I love 1st Ed. AD&D, I happen to own the PHB & DM Guides, but man is it dense and hard to grock at times. And Gary had a very adversarial relationship with his players that... well maybe it made sense for his table, full of rules lawyer wargamers but it sure didn't seem very fun for me.

 

I'd also be interested in any house rules you guys use with Moldvay... I'm tempted to add a few from Holmes for flavor or because they just seem better. I quite liked the idea of giving daggers two attacks per round, having initiative done with dex, and the five point alignment system (which seems like it's a good middle ground between the overly simplistic good-neutral-evil of Moldvay and the 9 point system we are familiar with but which also seems like it causes a lot of debate) from Holmes,

Why no Love for Frank Mentzers Red and Blue Box sets?

[The_TFT_DM]

I haven't checked those out much yet, only a took quick glance at Mentzers Basic. It seems the general preference, and my own personal one, is for Moldvay's Basic simply because it has the easiest to read rule book. Also, one of the YouTubers I follow for D&D history, DaddyRolledA1 plays Moldvay. Modlvay himself also has the appeal of also being a fellow Buckeye for me.

I'm curious though: what are the differences between Mentzer & Moldvay's basic in terms of rules? There are some "minor changes" mentioned on the wiki put I am curious as to what those are, beyond just the extra book that make B\X into BECMI.

I don't think I'd allow anyone to get to Immortal level, unless it were a one off! And I sort of like in OD&D Lvl 10 & up (presumably a little higher in B\X) everyone's characters become domain level lords or retire.

[Excior]

On 7/3/2024 at 6:46 PM, The_TFT_DM said:

I haven't checked those out much yet, only a took quick glance at Mentzers Basic. It seems the general preference, and my own personal one, is for Moldvay's Basic simply because it has the easiest to read rule book. Also, one of the YouTubers I follow for D&D history, DaddyRolledA1 plays Moldvay. Modlvay himself also has the appeal of also being a fellow Buckeye for me.

I'm curious though: what are the differences between Mentzer & Moldvay's basic in terms of rules? There are some "minor changes" mentioned on the wiki put I am curious as to what those are, beyond just the extra book that make B\X into BECMI.

I don't think I'd allow anyone to get to Immortal level, unless it were a one off! And I sort of like in OD&D Lvl 10 & up (presumably a little higher in B\X) everyone's characters become domain level lords or retire.

each weapon has its own damage dice not everything does a d6 I remember in the older basic editions variable weapon damage was just optional.

I think there are subtle changes to how some of the spells work and maybe thief ability chance of success may be different. There are not a whole lot of changes that I remember other than them being easier to understand. the Players hand book actually tried to teach you the game in a mini adventure.

[Black Wyvern]

On 7/3/2024 at 5:46 PM, The_TFT_DM said:

I'm curious though: what are the differences between Mentzer & Moldvay's basic in terms of rules? There are some "minor changes" mentioned on the wiki put I am curious as to what those are, beyond just the extra book that make B\X into BECMI.

Most of the difference is tone. The '81 edition (Moldvay, Cook, Marsh) was written because of a legal agreement with Arneson, due to a legal battle, to keep D&D, rather than AD&D in print. There was a large and extensive team who were tasked with re-editing the actual 1st edition basic book, by J Eric Holmes, the Moldvay Basic is the 2nd edition, and adding in more of D&D from the '74 edition, to make it more than an intro to AD&D, which is what Holmes' Basic had become. Anyway, the 2nd edition Basic, 1st edition Expert and proposed 1st edition Companion (it was never published) were intended to keep D&D alive. So they were written for adults, but it soon became apparent that 11 to 13 year olds were buying the Basic and Expert sets in droves, because of the lower price point. The '81 edition was written by adults for adults the reading level is 8th grade plus. Mentzer was given the project of rewriting the books for a younger audience and making the Basic book more of an introduction to the rules. Gygax worked very closely with him. At this point Gygax wanted Mentzer's '83 edition to have a different tone and be an obviously different set of rules. The Companion and Master sets took D&D in a very different direction from AD&D. They were also written with simpler language, at about the 5th grade reading level. Mentzer fans generally argue this is not the case but I have done many reading samples from both. I think the combination of simpler language and the fact the Mentzer basic is difficult to use as a reference is why Frank's edition has not been well accepted by the OSR. That and the fact that Frank's work is huge, while '81 is generally seen as more concise.

As far as the actual rules go there are very few minor changes. Frank Mentzer actually had an article online a few years ago outlining the changes, I have not been able to find it for some time though. I may miss some but this is a fairly good run down.

Magic-User and Elf spell book creation is handled differently. '81 only allows you to have as many spells in your spell book as you can cast in a day. For Mentzer you get that plus Read Magic and can copy found spells. This is by far the largest difference.

Thief spell progression is much slower, going over 36 rather than 14 levels. The '81 companion was intended to add more thief abilities in so the existing abilities maxed out at 14. Also change to hear noise is 1d6 in '81 and percentile in '83.

There are minor changes to spell progression and saving throws in the expert sets. Also a few errors in magic item descriptions were fixed.

---

As far as house rules for '81, I use:

the Greyhawk/Holmes spell book creation (intelligence based know spells). By the book Moldvay's is very restrictive,

Holmes Basic scroll creation rules, any magic-user or elf can create a scroll of any spell he/she knows for 100gp per level and 1 week per level.

AD&D Fighter attacks per round and Fighter attacks vs. 1hd or less creatures.

Start at 3rd level (well 5,000 xp). Mostly this is because I have played way more 1st level games through the years than anything else.

Minimum Hit Points, for the first three levels character hit die have minimum rolls, if the player rolls below it the minimum is used instead (d8 = 5, d6 = 4, d4 = 3),

My thief is completely different. Much better chances at lower levels of succeeding and maxing out before success is guaranteed (thief abilities max at 8th level). I also usually give thieves 1d6 hit die and they gain levels like Clerics as far as xp is concerned. Also after 8th level I have a list, it differs, of special abilities the thief gets per level.

That is about it.

 

 

 

Edited July 29 by Black Wyvern (see edit history)

[cailano]

Black Wyvern's comparison of B/X and BECMI is on point, which is no surprise. Both versions of D&D are excellent, but B/X has been far more influential in the OSR.

BECMI has its claims to fame, though. The BECMI Red Box remains the best introductory D&D set ever published, and the Rules Cyclopedia is the most complete rule book in D&D history.

[Black Wyvern]

5 hours ago, cailano said:

Both versions of D&D are excellent

This is certainly true. I didn't mean to disparage Mentzer's work. It is great for the demographic it was intended for and certainly introduces some fresh ideas to D&D. OSR players generally do not fit its intended demographic though. They are looking for easy compact concise rules, which is '81.

[cailano]

5 hours ago, Black Wyvern said:

This is certainly true. I didn't mean to disparage Mentzer's work. It is great for the demographic it was intended for and certainly introduces some fresh ideas to D&D. OSR players generally do not fit its intended demographic though. They are looking for easy compact concise rules, which is '81.

Valid. For many D&D campaigns, B/X is all you need.