I was going to write a full fledged review for Labyrinth Lord (LL) but after I started I just realized I didn't want to go through the tedium of explaining the entire game system when basically it's the same as Basic/Expert D&D.  So instead, I'm offering up this mini review that might answer some questions people have about the game.  Needless to say, this is laced with opinions, but I think the average reader can pick those out from the facts.

What is Labyrinth Lord?

LL is a fantasy role playing game from Goblinoid Games (http://www.goblinoidgames.com/labyrinthlord.htm ).  It can be downloaded for free or purchased through Lulu in several formats, including Hardcover.  It is an entirely self contained rules-medium game system contained in 132 pages.

Retro-Clone

LL is a Retro-Clone game.  Retro-Clone is both a movement and a product design.  The product design is one that uses the OGL to produce a very similar copy of an existing, but out of print, game.  This allows for the game to be sold legally and for new products to be made available once again for said (original) system.  The movement is one that wishes to make old school OOP games once more available and viable for gamers of the new generation and to recapture the love of many gamers from the old generation.

LL is a Retro-Clone game based off of old Basic D&D (2nd edition edited by Moldvay) and Expert D&D (edited by Dave Cook & Steve Marsh).

Productions values & Appearance

You can download the game for free, so I'm pretty sure you get a good idea of how it looks and what it contains.  However, it is much more attractive in printed form.

I purchased the Hardcover version from Lulu and I am very satisfied (although it took a long time to get, about 3 weeks).  The book is very well put together and the binding seems very solid and the paper durable.  It is a nice looking professional package.

The cover is full color (featuring a terribly amateur illustration) and the interior is black and white (with much nicer illustrations, unfortunately many of them are clip art and I've seen many of them before) two columns in a very readable print (probably a 10 pt font).  Tables are easy to find, the organization is pretty good, and it has a good index and table of contents.

On its own Merits

The obvious question is how it compares to BD&D.  This is a question I will attempt to answer...a bit later.  To me, a more important question is how does it stand based on its own merits?

The author (Daniel Proctor) is very upfront about not taking credit for the system and very persistent that this is a retro-clone game designed to give people a tool to create BD&D games and supplements.  This appropriately modest attitude is one of the things that makes this game attractive to me and has given me a lot of respect for Daniel.  That said I think he deserves credit for his efforts and hard work in bringing this product to life anyway.  I guarantee it took a lot of hard work and dedication to put this together and get the word out, and he certainly deserves credit for that.

Still, the fact remains that LL is in print and available and Basic D&D really isn't.  So how does it stack up on its own, sitting on the table top with a group of people sitting around playing LL?  The answer would be, very well.  It is a very solid framework to hang your campaign on.  It provides all the rules that a group needs and simple guidelines to handle covering all the things that aren't specifically covered by a rule during the game.  

LL is complete, concise, easy to use, and fun to read.  It reminds me of all the reasons I used to love role playing more than I do now (Nostalgia aside).  It provides a solid framework while leaving enough room to move around.  It doesn't give rules for every situation, but instead puts emphasis on role playing things out, narration, and just having fun.  Things that have become "mechanical" in newer games (like, say, making a spot check to see something sitting in front of your face) are things that are handled through role playing and descriptively describing what your PC does (" I look under the bed, do I see anything?").  

Compared to Basic D&D

If I had to try to give an actual percentage, I would say that LL is about 90% compatible with BD&D.  Most of the actual rules changes are cosmetic.  Things like the order things are given on tables are changed around or names are given a little change (the Dragon Breath save becomes Breath Attacks, for example).

Still, there are a few changes that, while not major, are different.  For example there are rules for variable dice roll techniques for generating character stats (instead of simply rolling 3d6 in BD&D).  Starting gold is 3D8 x 10 instead of 3d6 x 10.  Clerics start with a spell at first level.  Experience point awards for special abilities are based on loose guidelines rather than the specific asterisk system in BD&B.  There are more, but as you can see, they are all pretty minor and don't have a HUGE effect on the game or compatibility.  The author does takes some minor liberties in including rules that he probably thinks are better, were in supplements of later books (like the RC), or should have been included in the original...but again, nothing major at all.

Probably one of the biggest differences is organization.  After 28 years of looking at the old BD&D rulebooks I know where everything is...LL reorganizes and combines a bit.  It's not bad and wouldn't affect a new player or someone less intimately attuned to BD&D, but it's a change that takes some getting used to.  LL tends to tuck away rules in blocks of text instead of making them stick out under sub-headings and I think this is a bit of a flaw, though not detrimental.  For example, in Basic D&D there is a "Restrictions" and "Special Abilities" section under each character description while in LL these factors are simply rolled into the Class description.  Things like MUs only being able to use a dagger are tucked away instead of right in your face.

Final Thoughts

I'm very happy with LL.  The product is a good one and I wouldn't hesitate recommending it to newbies just starting, experienced gamers looking for something that allows them more freedom, or those who want to remember what BD&D was like at its best.

Personally I'm hoping it catches on enough that we will start seeing products being put out under the OGL.  Not only is this an opportunity for people to put out compatible BD&D products (finally), but it is also a chance to help expand on a "new" game...sort of a chance to go back in time and be there from the beginning and have an active role in how the game progresses.

Talk about it!

LL has a fledgling forum starting up.  I'm hoping fans of the game, or BD&D come over and start talking it up (http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/goblinoidgames.html ).

Thanks for the review. I've been poor lately but this is something I've been planning of getting a Print copy of. (We won't talk about where all my ink went from my printer. )

It and FtA look cool.

I started out quite skeptical about LL. After reading through the PDF though, I don't have many complaints.

Two points spring to mind as valid criticisms.

Firstly, I could if I chose buy the Mentzer edition of the game on PDF or instead get a hard copy on ebay, for not much money. So I'd question the need for LL.

Secondly, the map of the setting... Well, no. I understand the retro desire, but why make a setting map thats almost but not quite the same? Either you'll have the old one and you'll use the same names, or it doesn't matter an inch and you could just have a different map. Thats an area where I think that LL just shouldn't try to emulate the old game.

Other than that, its a nice little product. Will I play it? No point really, I've got all of my old books still and use those. But I'll definitely keep an eye out for other products sold for use with LL.

Quote from: CabTwo points spring to mind as valid criticisms.

Firstly, I could if I chose buy the Mentzer edition of the game on PDF or instead get a hard copy on ebay, for not much money. So I'd question the need for LL.

Secondly, the map of the setting... Well, no. I understand the retro desire, but why make a setting map thats almost but not quite the same? Either you'll have the old one and you'll use the same names, or it doesn't matter an inch and you could just have a different map. Thats an area where I think that LL just shouldn't try to emulate the old game.

Other than that, its a nice little product. Will I play it? No point really, I've got all of my old books still and use those. But I'll definitely keep an eye out for other products sold for use with LL.

1)  LL is a tool to produce products for BD&D (or LL itself).  I can't write and sell a Basic D&D adventure, setting, or supplement...I can for LL.  That is really the main point of the whole product...and the reason I felt it was important to comment on the game as a stand alone game vs. as a BD&D clone.

2)  The map is provided as a sort of old school fun.  Players are suposed to have fun fleshing it out, comparing notes and talking about what they did with it.  It's not provided as an "official" campaign setting or anything.  There is some talk about it on the forum that I provided a link to.

Quote from: CabOther than that, its a nice little product. Will I play it? No point really, I've got all of my old books still and use those. But I'll definitely keep an eye out for other products sold for use with LL.

I've been tossing this around a bit myself.  I'm perfectly content with playing old Basic D&D...but making an honest switch to LL does have some advantages.  First, all my players can download a copy.  Second, my material will be compatible with LL if I decide to share it or sell it online.  Third, the notion of being part of something "active" and helping if form out of the gate has a bit of appeal.  BD&D comes with preconceived notions; LL doesn't, even if it is a BD&D clone.

Very small things, but things I personally think are worth weighing the value of.

Thanks, I had heard about it then forgotten. There's no point in a longer review of something that can be downloaded free and that is very similar to something familiar to most gamers.

Quote from: NicephorusThanks, I had heard about it then forgotten. There's no point in a longer review of something that can be downloaded free and that is very similar to something familiar to most gamers.

That's the way I feel, but, you would be suprised at how many people ask to be "sold" on a game that they can download for free,  It never fails to amaze me.

In a way I wanted people to take a look at it and see it for its possibilities, rather than just saying, "Oh, BD&D...why bother, I already have that under a stack of books in my closet."

Quote from: grubman1)  LL is a tool to produce products for BD&D (or LL itself).  I can't write and sell a Basic D&D adventure, setting, or supplement...I can for LL.  That is really the main point of the whole product...and the reason I felt it was important to comment on the game as a stand alone game vs. as a BD&D clone.

Indeed. I'd approve of the game for that reason alone. I'm not complaining you understand; but bear in mind, that even though you can't sell products for BD&D there are clones out there already. If this clone turns out to be the one that gives us new adventures, settings and ideas then great.

Quote2)  The map is provided as a sort of old school fun.  Players are suposed to have fun fleshing it out, comparing notes and talking about what they did with it.  It's not provided as an "official" campaign setting or anything.  There is some talk about it on the forum that I provided a link to.

Fair enough. Seemed rather too fluffy to me, if you get what I'm saying.

I don't mean my two criticisms to imply that I don't think LL is a good idea, it quite clearly IS a good idea. I rate it more highly than C&C, for example.

May I ask, how do you rate BFRPG?

(for the uninitiated, thats here:
http://basicfantasy.org/downloads.html)

Quote from: CabMay I ask, how do you rate BFRPG?

Probably not a good idea as some of the people around here know.

BFRPG is a fine product.  I don't like it personally for a number of reasons that people can certainly disagree with.

1)  The author takes credit for "creating" the game, rather than giving credit to the original game like LL does.

2)  BFRPG arrogantly puts restrictions on what can and can't be produced for the game under its OGL license wanting people to conform to the author's ideals of what the game should be.  LL doesn't, it wants the player/reader to do whatever they want and think the game should be.

3) LL is more professionally written, edited, and presented.

4)LL doesn't mix and match information from various editions of basic.  It also doesn't incorporate some D20 mechanics while ignoring others making for a very patchwork game.

5) LL is compatible with BD&D, giving you the choice to use material from the old game with it, make your own material for either game, or simply using it as a supplement to BD&D as you choose.  BFRPG is just sort of out there on its own, a copy that is only half of what its predecessor is, but not original or innovative enough to stand on its own.

6)  Need I go on?  I could probably come up with a few more, but in the end, I don't much care for BFRPG, while I do like LL. Just a matter of personal prefference and experience.

Holy shit! An old school RPG! :eek:

Cool... oh, wait.












It's been done one hundred times already :barf:

Jesus, what is it with the various old school trend? Don't we have enough already? Osric, Hackmaster, C&C, Basic Fantasy, Gods & Monsters, Monsters & Mazes.

This... "thing" seems to fill the same niche as Basic Fantasy. Except without taking advantage of anything that has happened in the last few decades. What's the point of LL?

Grubman: Glad you like the game but don't expect it to catch on. No community will be built around such an unoriginal and mediocre project. It's been done to death, and the more clones are coming out, the less chances an actual unified community will be built around them.

Quote from: Consonant DudeThis... "thing" seems to fill the same niche as Basic Fantasy. Except without taking advantage of anything that has happened in the last few decades. What's the point of LL?

Consonant Dude, you are being a retard.  Two of the biggest things to happen to gaming in the last few decades would be the Open Gaming License and the ability to publish on the internet.  The whole frickin' point of LL is to leverage those developments for the Moldvay/Cook fan.

Quote from: jrientsConsonant Dude, you are being a retard.  Two of the biggest things to happen to gaming in the last few decades would be the Open Gaming License and the ability to publish on the internet.  The whole frickin' point of LL is to leverage those developments for the Moldvay/Cook fan.

I was going to say the same thing (without the retard comment ), but you already covered it.  

I thought I explained in the review itself the purpose of LL as a tool to publish and share BD&D compatable material?  Perhaps I was confusing...or mabey Consonant Dude didn't bother to actually read it before posting?  I dummo?:confused:

Quote from: jrientsConsonant Dude, you are being a retard.  Two of the biggest things to happen to gaming in the last few decades would be the Open Gaming License and the ability to publish on the internet.  The whole frickin' point of LL is to leverage those developments for the Moldvay/Cook fan.

You are delusional. It ain't gonna happen. Everything needed to publish such material is already available. The Moldvay/Cook fans are already as active as they can be on various message boards and websites. This isn't going to change a thing.

Plus, almost everybody who actually cares about those old rulesets already has them. Everybody else has options like Basic Fantasy. There are plenty of old school games.

I'd bet anything that a large majority of the people who will buy this at Lulu already have their old material and all the modules they need. This is just one more in a long line of products aimed solely at nostalgic fans.

I much prefer an effort like Pundit's FtA!, which is proudly going for an old school vibe yet providing his own mix.  The LL thing is totally irrelevant and will be forgotten in a few months.

Quote from: grubmanI thought I explained in the review itself the purpose of LL as a tool to publish and share BD&D compatable material?  Perhaps I was confusing...or mabey Consonant Dude didn't bother to actually read it before posting?  I dummo?:confused:

How were they not able to publish such material before, Grubman? Rules are fair game. Anybody can already publish whatever they want. Nobody does because few people actually care.

I fail to see how this is going to change things.

LL has too much competition to be relevant at this point. I understand that for super-die-hard fans, each edition of D&D is vastly different, but the reality is that C&C and Hackmaster have pretty much covered the nostalgia ground for old school flavors of this brand.

It's not like Basic Fantasy is doing great. Everybody applauded when Osric was released. It was hyped and celebrated. But there's not much being done with it.

Maybe I'm not seeing the point. I've got my old sets. I keep them for the memories, that's pretty much it.

Quote from: Consonant DudeYou are delusional. It ain't gonna happen. Everything needed to publish such material is already available. The Moldvay/Cook fans are already as active as they can be on various message boards and websites. This isn't going to change a thing.

What makes this different from Osric, in your opinion?  Stuff is being published for that.

QuotePlus, almost everybody who actually cares about those old rulesets already has them. Everybody else has options like Basic Fantasy. There are plenty of old school games.

What exactly is your objection to one more option?

QuoteI'd bet anything that a large majority of the people who will buy this at Lulu already have their old material and all the modules they need. This is just one more in a long line of products aimed solely at nostalgic fans.

Agreed and agreed.  But does that make the game objectionable?  I don't think so.  For my own part, I like the idea of being able to run my favorite edition of D&D and not have to get over the Out of Print = Dead hurdle when recruiting players.

QuoteI much prefer an effort like Pundit's FtA!, which is proudly going for an old school vibe yet providing his own mix.  The LL thing is totally irrelevant and will be forgotten in a few months.

I can't disagree with this.  FtA! is one of a handful of retro games that really hit their mark.  But I think FtA! belongs to the entirely different subset of games like Hackmaster, Mazes & Minotaurs, Castles & Crusades, and Encounter Critical that are new games designed with an intentional old school flavor.  That's a totally different approach than the OGL restatement projects like Osric.  To judge one approach by the standards of another strikes me as dumbassed.