I don't play Dungeons & Dragons - I have, but I don't tend to. Since I'm usually the one running the games I tend to run a great variety. However, I was reading a newly purchased pdf of the Rules Cyclopedia, and it peaked my interest. I am a "less is more" player and GM. This game seemed to solve many of the concerns I had about playing and running other editions Dungeons & Dragons (3rd, Pathfinder, and to a lesser extent 1st edition) - mainly that when there's so much to keep track of about your character, it makes me feel like there are fewer options, not more.

What are your experiences with this iteration - what are its strengths over other editions? What can I expect should I attempt to run it?

//Panjumanju

Pros: It's fun

What else is there?

You might like it. It's fairly simple and it's all in one book.

RC is a really great reference for old hat lovers of the BECMI sequence, but as an entry point into that version of D&D it is a slog at best and a nightmare at worst.

I recommend instead just getting the Basic and Expert PDFs from DTRPG, and start from there. You'll get a much more clearly written and frictionless introduction to the game, and if you later want to get RC so you can have all the high level rules and extra bits in one single tome, go for it once you know you like the core game and want those extra bits.

It's not a bad choice.  (I don't like the art, but that's personal taste.)  I'd advise ignoring the optional rules for "general skills" and "weapons mastery" (again, a personal taste thing, but I think those tacked-on subsystems change the way the game works in ways I dislike).

1) Solid iteration of D&D Rules. It does what D&D does and does it well.
2) It has rules for Kingdoms/Hiring People/Running Environments beyond dungeon crawling.
3) Fairly significant bestiary
4) Weapons far more balanced against one another than most D&D.
5) Spells fairly well balanced.
6) Skill System/Weapon Mastery rules that work, and work well. Even if you chose to not use them it works better IMO than any other system.

Drawbacks:
1) Not enough Mystara Setting, you'll have to get supplements or something else for a world.
2) Mages are not balanced well against other classes, there are simple fixes for that. (The penalties for Magic Users are more significant than their benefits, especially with their well balanced spells.)*
3) Its a big book takes a lot of reading.



*I've got a PDF that details point building each class to compare them, I'm not sure where it is at the moment. My fixes were to allow spellcasting to be done while moving as long as its not fast movement, and allowing an AC bonus from Int.

It is a good "whole game in one book", but FOR ME, the free retroclones like Swords & Wizardry or Labyrinth Lord (or even a retrowhatever like Mazes & Minotaurs) does a better job than the RC.

BTW, if you like fantasy and like rules light, but want something different than D&D, check out Mazes & Minotaurs
http://storygame.free.fr/MAZES.htm

The RC is great in that it has all of the rules you'll ever need in a single book. The optional systems (skills, weapon mastery, etc.) are generally solid, and easily ignored if you don't want to use them.  

The downsides (IMO):
(a) The default assumption that all characters will progress from level 1 to 36 (or non-humans through various 'attack ranks') is not one that I favour (I prefer a level range of 1 to around 12-15)
(b) The art (not horrible, but just not that great)
(c) Thieves' abilities (which are horrible to begin with) progress far too slowly

I personally prefer (slightly) the B/X D&D rules (Molvday/Cook version), as the level range (1-14) and art (Otus, Dee) are more to my taste.  But I would have no hesitation using the RC.

Also, I think that if you're going to use all the options in the RC (skills, weapon mastery, etc.), the overall game will not be much 'lighter' overall in terms of rules than (core) AD&D.  So if you want a 'rules light' version of D&D, use the options in the RC with caution.

Quote from: Panjumanju;678443What are your experiences with this iteration - what are its strengths over other editions? What can I expect should I attempt to run it?

The best thing I can say to sell Rules Cyclopedia is that it is almost as good as B/X D&D and BECMI D&D

Quote from: J Arcane;678529I recommend instead just getting the Basic and Expert PDFs from DTRPG, and start from there.

What are the differences between Basic and Expert?
(And am I right to assume "B/X" stands for "Basic and Expert"?)

//Panjumanju

Quote from: Panjumanju;678618What are the differences between Basic and Expert?
(And am I right to assume "B/X" stands for "Basic and Expert"?)

Basic is levels 1-3. Expert is levels 4-14. Together they give you a complete RPG in 128 pages.

BECMI started in a similar pattern with Companion being levels 15-25, Master 26-36, and Immortals >36. B/X is better written IMO and the 1-14 range is both better (as Thieves Skills increase faster and racial limits make more sense) and more accurately reflects most D&D games.

Quote from: Silverlion;678572*I've got a PDF that details point building each class to compare them, I'm not sure where it is at the moment. My fixes were to allow spellcasting to be done while moving as long as its not fast movement, and allowing an AC bonus from Int.

I believe this is what you are thinking of. I had a AD&D version from years ago until I found this. Perfect Class at breeyark.org

If you're okay with race-as-class, it sounds like the Rules Cyclopedia would be right up your alley.

In my experience, M-Us were definitely not disadvantaged. On the contrary, I'd say that at higher levels, unless you are using weapon mastery, they would vastly outshine fighters.