Taylor Liss
United States
Quincy
Massachusetts
-
I know it gets a lot of love on the 'geek, but has it been overshadowed by newer systems? (3.5 / Pathfinder / 4th) Will someone without the nostalgia factor really enjoy it?
-
James Lowry
United States
Sunnyvale
California
-
As always, it will depend. It will depend on what you want out of an RPG.
On one hand, part of the point of it is to be an intro to the world of RPGs in general, and I don't think you'll get much out of that. 
On the other hand, it is the framework of the Basic/Expert flavor of D&D, and is very good for that. As a system, it's a very light one, and is entirely early-model class-based. Roll your attributes, pick a class(/race) based on the dice, figure out your spells and equipment, and you're ready to go. Races are classes, instead of a set of extra abilities, and there's no such thing as 'skills' (other than thief abilities). I haven't played D&D outside of 1e and B/E so I can't comment directly, other than it is a different animal.
The set itself is limited to levels 1-3, and generally assumes adventures will be some form of dungeon crawl. The included adventure, is fairly good for the genre, and while it effectively all dungeon crawl, there is scope for more (mostly playing one group of monsters off another).
If you want the system as a whole, there's three choices: Dungeons & Dragons Rules Cyclopedia, which is an evolved version of BECM, including a skill system. The retro-clone Dark Dungeons, which is a further evolved version with a re-worked skill system and Immortals (and Spelljammer). Or, there's: Labyrinth Lord, which is a retro-clone of the previous version, and sticks to the simplicity of a no-skill system.
-
Chris Talbot
Canada
Fort Smith
Northwest Territories
Be seeing you... -Alphonse
-
I have the nostalgia factor, so my answer is probably somewhat biased.
Red Box D&D comes from a simpler time, when there weren't rules for everything. There's a lot of DM fiat going on when it comes to skills and social situations. Combat is much simpler and doesn't include all the detailed tactical options available in AD&D 2E and beyond.
The game is fun in its simplicity.
Chris
-
-
Samort7 wrote: I know it gets a lot of love on the 'geek, but has it been overshadowed by newer systems? (3.5 / Pathfinder / 4th) Will someone without the nostalgia factor really enjoy it?
Sure.
I think Basic blows the newer systems you mentioned out of the water, but that's subjective. I think we've seen all the different opinions about all that here quite sufficiently.
But there are two less subjective reasons to give it a whirl. It's one of the most important and influential RPG systems ever, so if you're interested in the history of these games, RPG design, etc., then it's a must. Plus, some truly nifty adventures came out of the system, mainly in the Expert series. Those alone are worth the price of admission.
Have fun!
-
Freelance Police
United States
Palo Alto
California
-
Samort7 wrote: I know it gets a lot of love on the 'geek, but has it been overshadowed by newer systems?
Hoo boy. Yes. If you're fine with swinging a sword and hitting something, fine. But if you want anything outside of the dungeon, or cinematic chrome, this won't work.
What's the context? Someone on Amazon trying to sell you this for $250? 
-
SJ Benoist
United States
Saint Charles
Missouri
-
Samort7 wrote: I know it gets a lot of love on the 'geek, but has it been overshadowed by newer systems? (3.5 / Pathfinder / 4th) Will someone without the nostalgia factor really enjoy it?
I can not speak for anyone but myself.
Doing so, the major difference is this: I won't play or run 3.5/4e/Pathfinder any longer. I'd play or run the BECMI system in a heartbeat.
FWIW, I'm also a fan of Dragon Age RPG, Set 1. I believe it captures a similar feel to the old "Red Box". Much more of a "Do It Yourself" approach to gaming (as mentioned by an earlier post).
-
Eric Jome
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
-
Samort7 wrote: Will someone without the nostalgia factor really enjoy it?
It is a rules light, straightforward, simple dungeon crawler. Compared to more modern fare, there's much more DIY here - there's no meaty rule system for resolving most things. Even combat is fairly light. The rules tell the GM to resolve most things by rolling a d20 and comparing that to one of the character's main attributes.
As a game system, it's pretty solid, but pretty simple. Since there is so much you have to bring to the game yourself when you play, you'll get as much out of it as you put into it. If you can put in a lot of sexycoolfun, you'll get that out. If you can just roll with the situation, win or lose, and you have a spirit of adventure, exploration, and creativity while you play, it should easily rival most games.
-
Eric Jome
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
-
Sam and Max wrote: Samort7 wrote: I know it gets a lot of love on the 'geek, but has it been overshadowed by newer systems? Hoo boy. Yes. If you're fine with swinging a sword and hitting something, fine. But if you want anything outside of the dungeon, or cinematic chrome, this won't work.
In my opinion, most of the entire genetic history of role playing games rises directly from this game in response to the ideas portrayed in the above exchange.
First, you'll play this version and you'll run into a situation that isn't resolvable by poking it with a 10' pole or hitting it with a magic missle - say you need to talk someone into something for example. At this stage in RPG evolution, there are no specific rules for this, just a general rule; "What's your argument? Okay, roll a d20 and tell me your Charisma score and I, the GM, will tell you how it turns out - roll low = bad, high = good."
But then, you've gotta ask yourself, is that interesting or fair? Many people have answered no. Thus, many more recently produced games have created elaborate and crunchy rules or mechanics for resolving this in intricate ways. That's a fair response.
If you're into that sort of thing.
This older method, even though it had some subjectivity and was simple and sometimes vague, was very fast and very creative and very easy to understand. This game flowed very quickly, accomplished a lot in a short time and made room for fresh and interesting situations. The very things that people didn't like ("arbitrary and unclear") were also the things that make it good ("freedom and creativity")... so new animals have evolved to fill the niche. Mostly these are direct descendents, like Pathfinder or 4th edition.
Second, one of the complaints is that the GM in this system has a lot of control, making lots of decisions on the fly and creating big parts of the story and world on their own. So, if you got stuck with a crappy GM, you got a crappy game. That's not cool. Another fork in the family tree is born - games where the players contribute a lot to the story directly. Instead of one person's opinion of how it should go or be, committees of people reach consensus...
And maybe sometimes a tribe of chiefs and no warriors does well too.
With a good GM, like a benevolent dictatorship or enlightened monarch, you get great results - high efficiency and great story. Mysteries, drama, tension, direction, pacing... like a good author or storyteller, the good GM makes the game better than average. True, a bad GM is less good, but a good GM is fantastic.
So, rather than think of more recent games as strictly better, I tend to think of them as more specialized, filling ecological niches in the environment of RPGs in different ways. They aren't more or less valid and this game doesn't really deserve the scorn that their devotees often direct its way.
-
Merric Blackman
Australia
Waubra
Victoria
Ramping up my reviewing.
Happily playing games for many, many years.
-
Yes, you should try it, if only to see if the style of play is something you'd enjoy.
My players run screaming from it because they prefer the deeper mechanical options of more recent editions (3E, 4E). As a DM, I'm happy to run it and I have a lot of good memories of it. Well, not actually of it, as I started with the Moldvay edition (1981), which I think is better written (Mentzer maintained the same ruleset, and upped the graphical presentation).
It's never wrong to try a game. It's also never wrong to realise its (a) not for you and you should abandon it or (b) it's for you and you should play a lot more of it.
There's not a lot in the Mentzer/Moldvay editions of Basic D&D that is a problem design-wise: the game is a jewel. (AD&D is another story, with a lot of confusing and superfluous mechanics - a better AD&D can be distilled, but I'd have trouble making a better Basic D&D).
Cheers,
Merric
-
If Actions Speak Louder Than Words, Then Actions x2 Speak Louder Than Actions
United States
Hutto
Texas
One of the Original Twelve
-
Blech! Get rid of it, post haste! I'll send you an address where you can conveniently ditch it.
-
The Harnish
Germany
Duisburg
NRW
Cult of The Harnish Leader
-
MerricB wrote: There's not a lot in the Mentzer/Moldvay editions of Basic D&D that is a problem design-wise: the game is a jewel. (AD&D is another story, with a lot of confusing and superfluous mechanics - a better AD&D can be distilled, but I'd have trouble making a better Basic D&D).
Amen. It's my understanding that Dan Proctor's main design goal in making the Advanced Edition Companion for Labyrinth Lordwas to try and capture the way people often played AD&D back in the 1980s which involved jettisoning most of the needlessly complicated bits. The results are essentially The Moldvay-Cook B/X ruleset with the race & class combinations & rules from AD&D. Best yet it's compatible with both the AD&D and basic D&D modules.
-
William Hostman
United States
Eagle River
Alaska
Gaming in Greater Anchorage area, Alaska since 1978. Looking for Indy-willing RPG players in Eagle River (or willing to drive to Eagle River). Geekmail me if interested.
Yes, this really is what I looked like when I uploaded that avatar. Not that it's quite current anymore.
-
Samort7 wrote: I know it gets a lot of love on the 'geek, but has it been overshadowed by newer systems? (3.5 / Pathfinder / 4th) Will someone without the nostalgia factor really enjoy it?
It's simple KTAATTS type RPGing. If you have it, it's worth giving a few sessions to... and if you like, continue on to Expert (or Cyclopedia or Dark Dungeons).
It will help your pathfinder and 3.X play seeing where 3.x evolved from, in the same way 3.X play will enhance your 4.x games, and vice versa.
Oh, and what you've shown isn't the "Original" red box, it's the Mentzer red box, which is a better starter than the Moldvay red box. That's like saying Ms America is hotter than the 1st runner up... a matter of degree resulting in pedigree difference, but not enough to matter in terms of comparison to peppermint patty...
-
|
|
