Community

Aug 6, 2012 -- 7:29PM, Yabr wrote:

I miss some of the things that the Rules Cyclopedia omits as a D&D (minus the 'A') product, but this book is one of the most nicely indexed, organized, easiest to read rules products (IMO) ever to be produced by TSR. Possibly because it is the distilled result of so many box set incarnations.

It is a shame that BECMI is made up of boxed sets. From what I can tell they are much less economical to reprint than a regular book. I think the loose binder format of 2nd Edition's MC products is why that edition hasn't got covered by WotC's reprint machine yet.

Aug 6, 2012 -- 7:29PM, Yabr wrote:

I have OSRIC, Labrynth Lord, White Box Swords & Wizardry, 1st edition, and 2nd edition AD&D references on my shelf, but I turn to the Rules Cyclopedia, again and again as a quick, ready reference for old school gaming. It is just so nicely layed out. Virtually everything you need for a fantasy RPG minus the stuff that just boggs things down.

You have OSRIC, LL and S&W, but have you tried Dark Dungeons, from Gratis Games? From what I am told anyone that likes the RC and BECMI will like Dark Dungeons.

Well, when I say "anyone", I'm not going to include Frank in that, as I don't think anyone ever asked his opinion on the system yet.

Aug 13, 2012 -- 11:23AM, TSRFrank wrote:

Jul 30, 2012 -- 3:01PM, Bloodlust1997 wrote:

Even mentzer himself has said he's not fond of the book that took his edition and mashed it into one, making you use all the rules.

Not quite. The whole setup is Guidelines Not Rules, whether in BECMI or the RC. But I thought Aaron brought in several 2e bits (like Skills) which had not been integrated fully or properly. I spent years working out that complete D&D BECMI system, and didn't (and don't) appreciate some of the RC changes and additions that were in conflict with it.

I have wondered if you ever thought about what could have followed up B/X and BECMI to be the third (forth?) version of the classic rules. It went from two bits to five bits. Would you have compacted it into a single book or added even more installments (i.e. BECMI + KS) and kept it so that later bits (either boxed sets or books) were optional modules that could be bolted on?

Aug 13, 2012 -- 11:23AM, TSRFrank wrote:

Also, the RC essentially made the BECMI game world mandatory. Although Bruce Heard did a fabulous job coordinating all the gazetteers and such, I think the setting should not be bundled with the core rule book (just as no setting was bundled with the Advanced rules). That choice should be left entirely to the users.

To be fair, I would assume that both Allston and Heard were obeying Orders From Above regarding the inclusion of 2e bits and the setting.

That is something I'd want from gaming too (take note D&D Next designers). I personally think that campaign settings are the interesting things and that rule systems are there to help the settings come to life.

If D&D is for players, I should be able to take a setting like Mystara, and plug it into AD&D, 3rd Edition, 4th Edition or D&D Next and still have it "feel" like Mystara. The job of a game engine (either RC or anything else) is to facilitate things for the GM and get out of the way of the storytelling.

It was interesting to see that D&D Next is going to allow for three types of arcane spellcasting, but I would ask if it is going to be able to do what RC or BECMI does (not necessarily the same way). For one thing is D&D Next going to shoehorn GMs into Jeff Grubb's Great Wheel or Frank Mentzer's BECMI cosmology...or facilitate both (somehow).

Aug 14, 2012 -- 6:43AM, TSRFrank wrote:

Aug 14, 2012 -- 5:19AM, odinist wrote:

I'll be frank.

Hey, that's MY job.

Aw. I wanted to be Frank too?

Aug 17, 2012 -- 6:57AM, draigthedm wrote:

Aug 13, 2012 -- 11:23AM, TSRFrank wrote:

Also, the RC essentially made the BECMI game world mandatory. Although Bruce Heard did a fabulous job coordinating all the gazetteers and such, I think the setting should not be bundled with the core rule book (just as no setting was bundled with the Advanced rules).

I disagree here.  3rd ed and beyond are set in Greyhawk.  there are no gazeteer info but deities etc... all aim at Greyhawk.  Do I play greyhawk no never really liked the setting.  do I play Mystare Yes  but that is a personal preference.  in 3rd I play a generic world or Mystara depending on my group.

There was a Greyhawk-lite element in 3rd Edition's PHB (just as there was a Mystara element to RC), but Frank wasn't saying that the two were not combined elsewhere. He was saying that the rules and settings should not be combined. Maybe he also thinks that the inclusion of GH-lite elements in the 3e core is also mistake.

In fact, I know some Greyhawk fans that don't totally appreciate the GH-lite thing. There are some things in core 3e rulebooks that are either not supposed to be part of the World of Greyhawk or are out-and-out parts of Forgotten Realms or other campaign settings. There inclusion in 3e corebooks and the "core = Greyhawk" thing that everyone thought was going on is a bit confusing. (An example of my own confusion with GH-lite is a monster called the equiceph, that was included as an undead critter in the GH subsetting bundled with Chainmail and then reused as a living critter - with no origin story - in 3e's Miniatures handbook. Miniatures Handbook was core. So does that mean it can be found wandering the Flanaess?) I think the same sort of confusion happens if you bundle BECMI and Mystara into a single package. If you actually tie the two together, it makes the BECMI rules into "setting information" and that stops them being "optional".

I think it is better for settings to springboard off of rules and for setting designers to add in some new rules to make the setting feel unique. I also feel strongly that settings should be able to exercise that concept of rules being guidelines and be able to turn off sections of the rules that clash with the vision of the setting. A key area, where Mystara is concerned is the concept of gods. Gods are fundimental to almost every edition of D&D...but not to Mystara. But to use Mystara with another set of rules (other than BECMI) all you need to do is switch of the idea of deities and reboot that concept as Immortals. Job done, the setting wins and D&D is doing the job it is supposed to. It is a little harder to do that with 3e Greyhawk, as you need to analyise the rules to see if all the embedded-stuff is really suppose to be there.

One thing I do like about 3e, is that it has an SRD (something I'd love to retroactivly be created for the RC/BECMI era). The SRD has not got Greyhawk-lite in it and if you want to run a 3rd Edition Mystara campaign it might be easier to take the SRD and Mystarar conversions and mix and match them to build a bespoke "Mystara PHB".