Lots of people saying that they ditch AD&D initiative and weapon versus armor rules... I agree. I think these ideas are nice, but the implementation is terrible. Too complicated. But if these rules were simpler, I'd be happy to try them.

One thing I like about AD&D is that STR affects encumbrance. I don't use they AD&D rule, instead I allow one item (about 5 pounds) per point of STR.

OK, so I find myself in a similar situation, starting a D&D campaign with a group of newbies who I want to introduce to a pretty simple iteration of the game (at least at the beginning).  What's the best Basic-like chassis to build off of and not give WotC any money?

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 15, 2023, 11:08:20 PM
OK, so I find myself in a similar situation, starting a D&D campaign with a group of newbies who I want to introduce to a pretty simple iteration of the game (at least at the beginning).  What's the best Basic-like chassis to build off of and not give WotC any money?

Especially for newbies I like White Box: Fantasy Medieval Adventure Game best - it's Swords & Wizardry White Box (so single save), printed at-cost, in a very nice presentation. Can be complemented with free/at cost material from Basic Fantasy RPG as desired (take 1 off BFRPG AC if you're a stickler) - there are some good BFRPG adventures such as JS Neal's Monkey Isle.

Mind you you can get 5e Basic on Lulu and play 5e without giving WoTC any money - https://www.lulu.com/shop/mike-mearls/dd-5e-basic-set-combined-edition/paperback/product-15gke8w9.html?page=1&pageSize=4 - I'd say that was also very good for new players, and less lethal than OD&D as written. Online version at https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules currently. It can be complemented with material from third party publishers and the 5e SRD. It would work great with Mystara, the Classic D&D world.

(Looking at the online version, it seems to have the entire SRD in it now, which turns it into standard 5e)

I'm wondering what the effects are of making certain changes. Like if you take the B/X ability score modifiers, that becomes particularly apparent in Strength.

A 13 Strength in B/X gives you a +1 to hit and damage, whereas you need a 17 Strength in AD&D for the same, and 18/75-76 in AD&D lines up with an 18 in B/X. If you're using B/X ability score modifiers and an AD&D module, do you re-calculate NPCs based on the B/X modifiers or do you keep the modifiers the same and adjust their Strength down?

Quote from: migo on May 16, 2023, 05:24:27 AM
If you're using B/X ability score modifiers and an AD&D module, do you re-calculate NPCs based on the B/X modifiers or do you keep the modifiers the same and adjust their Strength down?

I'd calculate their B/X combat stats based on their listed attributes in the D&D module. All the NPC Fighters probably have STR 18+ anyway. 

Going over Village of Hommlet, most of the Moathouse opposition have any damage bonus listed directly, eg +1 - I'd just use that in B/X. Only 2 enemy NPCs have listed stats:

The "Master's" lieutenant, a 4th level fighter-S 15, 112, W 10, D 15,
C 17, Ch 7-H.P.: 31; AC 1 (plate, shield, +1 for dexterity); move 6"; 1 attack by weapon. He has sword, hand axe, and dagger.

I'd use B/X statting: +1 to hit & damage for STR (instead of +0), -1 AC for DEX leaves AC unchanged at AC 1. He gets a +2 CON bonus in BX instead of +3 and d8 hd not d6, and I'd probably take 8 off his hp so HP 31>23.

THE NEW MASTER: 5th level cleric-S 18, I 9, W 18,
D 17, C 16, Ch 18-H.P.: 44; AC -1 (+1 plate with +3 for
dexterity); move 12"; staff of striking (20 charges) and mace.

I'd leave Lareth's stats unchanged, giving him +3/+3 in melee for STR, -2 AC for DEX 17 so AC -1 > AC 0. CON 16 gives +2 hp/die in both systems, but hd d8>d6, I'd take off 5 hp so HP 44 > 39.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on May 15, 2023, 11:08:20 PM
OK, so I find myself in a similar situation, starting a D&D campaign with a group of newbies who I want to introduce to a pretty simple iteration of the game (at least at the beginning).  What's the best Basic-like chassis to build off of and not give WotC any money?

There are several to choose from. Old School Essentials, Labyrinth Lord, Swords & Wizardry, Basic Fantasy (which is completely free in pdf form) and several others. Any of the B/X clones will get you up and running pretty quick. You can always add advanced options in later after players have gotten a feel for the basic game.

Quote from: Eric Diaz on May 14, 2023, 11:31:23 AM
EDIT: changed the tile to be more clear; I'm mixing AD&D and B/X: what are you favorite rules to import/export?

---
I have written extensively about why I love B/X*. It is my favorite format of D&D, but mostly because it's very easy, simple, manageable, streamlined. The organization is much better, IMO.

However, when comparing specific rules, I often favor using AD&D. For example, I prefer AD&D's:

- Attack progression (+1 per level for fighters).
- Fighter boost (1 attack per level against HD lower than 1, multiple atacks).
- Magic-user nerf (chances of learning spells and I kinda like the idea of components. kinda).
- Turn undead rules (undead leaders make everyone harder to turn IIRC).
- Race separate from class.
- d6 HP for thieves.

OTOH I dislike:

- Messy attribute bonus instead of the neat -3/+3 of B/X.
- Bard and druid strange class progression.
- Weapon versus armor table (that contains arithmetic erros and not even Gygax used, apparently).
- d10 HPs for fighters.

I have been thinking of writing about my favorite AD&D rules, despite not being a big AD&D fan (well, except for the DMG, I love that book).

So, what are your favorite/least favorites when comparing AD&D to Basic (or even 2e, RC, etc.).

*https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2023/01/a-glance-at-basic-d-bx-and-some-clones.html

Check out Advanced Labyrinth Lord. It's a mash-up of B/X and AD&D 1st. you might like what you see. The no-art versions of LL and Adv LL are free on DriveThruRPG

Given the inherent lethality of old school D&D in all forms it's always been rather unfathomable to me why people would prefer lower HD for characters other than "It's tradition."  That's the first thing we imported into our game when we got the PHB.  d10 HD for fighters? d8 for clerics?  d6 for thieves (not fucking rogues)?  Yes, please!  In the long run if you're rolling legit, there likely won't be a huge difference anyhow, but those few extra HP can be lifesaving at the lower levels.

Quote from: Persimmon on May 16, 2023, 09:52:57 AM
Given the inherent lethality of old school D&D in all forms it's always been rather unfathomable to me why people would prefer lower HD for characters other than "It's tradition."  That's the first thing we imported into our game when we got the PHB.  d10 HD for fighters? d8 for clerics?  d6 for thieves (not fucking rogues)?  Yes, please!  In the long run if you're rolling legit, there likely won't be a huge difference anyhow, but those few extra HP can be lifesaving at the lower levels.

Regardless of the HD type used for various classes, we usually house ruled early on that all first level characters start with max possible hit points. Of course it can be argued that making starting characters too resilient will interfere with players decisions about how combat obstacles are approached. After all, one does not have to come up with clever solutions to problems when beating them over the head with a sword will get the job done. If one tries to play RAW B/X with the mentality encouraged by later WOTC editions then the game will be far more than lethal, it will be a series of suicide missions. Having run these older systems for players who learned to play from these newer editions I have seen this play out. B/X is especially dangerous since clerics don't have access to spells until 2nd level. To me, that was a strong hint that charging into battle at every opportunity wasn't the best survival strategy.

Quote from: Persimmon on May 16, 2023, 09:52:57 AM
Given the inherent lethality of old school D&D in all forms it's always been rather unfathomable to me why people would prefer lower HD for characters other than "It's tradition."  That's the first thing we imported into our game when we got the PHB.  d10 HD for fighters? d8 for clerics?  d6 for thieves (not fucking rogues)?  Yes, please!  In the long run if you're rolling legit, there likely won't be a huge difference anyhow, but those few extra HP can be lifesaving at the lower levels.

In B/X the base assumption is all weapons do 1D6 damage, so the lower HD works fine. Oddly, due to how stat bonuses work, a 9th level B/X fighter might, on average, have more hit points than a 9th level AD&D fighter unless the AD&D fighter has a CON over 14.; they're both hitting 50 average HPs between 13-14 CON. Obviously at 18 CON the AD&D fighter is going to have a lot more. But say you have a 9th level thief w/18 CON; the B/X thief will average almost 50 HP, the same as the AD&D thief due to the cap of +2 HP.

I haven't worked out all the math, but stuff like this is pretty interesting. B/X allows for some very powerful characters if they have high stats, while AD&D seems to bump them up initially, and THEN recommends several stats above 15 for the bonuses. This is most likely straight out of the Greyhawk book to some degree, but the B/X stat bonuses are just better overall for non-fighter characters. It's very possible to have a B/X thief with high stats that overshadows a fighter of the same level in combat ability; throw in some magical armor and he might not even get hit as much. Hence, I think the AD&D progression promotes the fighter paradigm and probably has more to do with that than anything else just by going with the bonuses.

Quote from: Brad on May 16, 2023, 10:45:52 AM

Quote from: Persimmon on May 16, 2023, 09:52:57 AM
Given the inherent lethality of old school D&D in all forms it's always been rather unfathomable to me why people would prefer lower HD for characters other than "It's tradition."  That's the first thing we imported into our game when we got the PHB.  d10 HD for fighters? d8 for clerics?  d6 for thieves (not fucking rogues)?  Yes, please!  In the long run if you're rolling legit, there likely won't be a huge difference anyhow, but those few extra HP can be lifesaving at the lower levels.

In B/X the base assumption is all weapons do 1D6 damage, so the lower HD works fine. Oddly, due to how stat bonuses work, a 9th level B/X fighter might, on average, have more hit points than a 9th level AD&D fighter unless the AD&D fighter has a CON over 14.; they're both hitting 50 average HPs between 13-14 CON. Obviously at 18 CON the AD&D fighter is going to have a lot more. But say you have a 9th level thief w/18 CON; the B/X thief will average almost 50 HP, the same as the AD&D thief due to the cap of +2 HP.

I haven't worked out all the math, but stuff like this is pretty interesting. B/X allows for some very powerful characters if they have high stats, while AD&D seems to bump them up initially, and THEN recommends several stats above 15 for the bonuses. This is most likely straight out of the Greyhawk book to some degree, but the B/X stat bonuses are just better overall for non-fighter characters. It's very possible to have a B/X thief with high stats that overshadows a fighter of the same level in combat ability; throw in some magical armor and he might not even get hit as much. Hence, I think the AD&D progression promotes the fighter paradigm and probably has more to do with that than anything else just by going with the bonuses.

Interesting points; and of course another difference with later editions is that the characters keep rolling for HP after name level rather than getting a fixed value, which skews things on the higher end.

Nowadays at first level I just have all characters add their total Con score to base HP, but all rolls are as is from level 1.  This helps with survival at the low levels to a degree, but since we also use a fairly lethal Crit system, it doesn't matter too much, as death is still fairly common and even low level foes could potentially kill high level characters with good crit rolls.  Also, since we're currently playing Swords & Wizardry, the ability score bonuses are pretty minimal.

Quote from: blackstone on May 16, 2023, 09:37:53 AM

Quote from: Eric Diaz on May 14, 2023, 11:31:23 AM
EDIT: changed the tile to be more clear; I'm mixing AD&D and B/X: what are you favorite rules to import/export?

---
I have written extensively about why I love B/X*. It is my favorite format of D&D, but mostly because it's very easy, simple, manageable, streamlined. The organization is much better, IMO.

However, when comparing specific rules, I often favor using AD&D. For example, I prefer AD&D's:

- Attack progression (+1 per level for fighters).
- Fighter boost (1 attack per level against HD lower than 1, multiple atacks).
- Magic-user nerf (chances of learning spells and I kinda like the idea of components. kinda).
- Turn undead rules (undead leaders make everyone harder to turn IIRC).
- Race separate from class.
- d6 HP for thieves.

OTOH I dislike:

- Messy attribute bonus instead of the neat -3/+3 of B/X.
- Bard and druid strange class progression.
- Weapon versus armor table (that contains arithmetic erros and not even Gygax used, apparently).
- d10 HPs for fighters.

I have been thinking of writing about my favorite AD&D rules, despite not being a big AD&D fan (well, except for the DMG, I love that book).

So, what are your favorite/least favorites when comparing AD&D to Basic (or even 2e, RC, etc.).

*https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2023/01/a-glance-at-basic-d-bx-and-some-clones.html

Check out Advanced Labyrinth Lord. It's a mash-up of B/X and AD&D 1st. you might like what you see. The no-art versions of LL and Adv LL are free on DriveThruRPG

This is good advice. I was actually writing an ALL hack before the OGL debacle hit, might finish the task one day, or start over with BFRPG CC version.

Quote from: migo on May 16, 2023, 05:24:27 AM
I'm wondering what the effects are of making certain changes. Like if you take the B/X ability score modifiers, that becomes particularly apparent in Strength.

A 13 Strength in B/X gives you a +1 to hit and damage, whereas you need a 17 Strength in AD&D for the same, and 18/75-76 in AD&D lines up with an 18 in B/X. If you're using B/X ability score modifiers and an AD&D module, do you re-calculate NPCs based on the B/X modifiers or do you keep the modifiers the same and adjust their Strength down?

TBH I just use damage as written, if attack bonus isn't listed a 4th level Fighter has +4.

I´m using published DCC, BFRPG and LotFP adventures and NPCs do not usually have abilities scores.

Quote from: Persimmon on May 16, 2023, 09:52:57 AM
Given the inherent lethality of old school D&D in all forms it's always been rather unfathomable to me why people would prefer lower HD for characters other than "It's tradition."  That's the first thing we imported into our game when we got the PHB.  d10 HD for fighters? d8 for clerics?  d6 for thieves (not fucking rogues)?  Yes, please!  In the long run if you're rolling legit, there likely won't be a huge difference anyhow, but those few extra HP can be lifesaving at the lower levels.

For us, it was that the slight bump didn't really change anything.  We either played with it as is, on the grounds that if you got into a fight without an edge, it was bad.  Or we wanted more than a slight bump, if we were playing a different style. 

There was a brief window when we ported the ranger into our B/X game where we flirted with the idea that all classes got 2 HD at first level, but still had to roll them.  That was a strange mix, but fun in its own way.  It meant that most characters were more resilient, but you'd get the occasional really tough guy and sometimes still the "one minor hit away from death" other extreme.