Ability Scores are listed STR, INT, WIS first as these are the primary stats for the classes Fighting Man, Magic User and Cleric. Then DEX, CON, CHA are the secondary stats that support those three. It has to do with a Offensive-Support pairing of stats for classes. DEX should be 5th slot, but because of the Thief class it is lumped in with the primary abilities. This allows a player to compare primary ability score to select the best class, then compare support ability scores in the event of a tie.
@@krunchyfrogg So each class had a pair of stats that were most important. Fighting Man needed (STR, CON), Magic-User (INT, DEX ), Cleric (WIS, CHA), because those stats impacted those classes the most. So the stats were grouped primary (STR, INT, WIS) and support (CON, DEX, CHA) as this matched the FM, MU, C class list. After Thief was introduced, DEX became a primary, it moved up to 4th slot.
Oh ok! I get it! I started with BECMI, and later learned that, in OD&D, the thief class was added later. I figured out the reason of the order to the first 4 stats was because of the classes, but I didn’t ever think about the order of CON/CHA. Thank you!
As a Player and DM that started with the 1974/75 rules (OD&D), plus Chainmail, plus Moldvay, and AD&D 1e, and BECMI, and have to say you’re doing a great job with your videos.
I'll never forget opening the Basic red box, and seeing an RPG for the first time. Nowadays, the RC is my rule book of choice, but I still love the red box!
Oh man, me too. I spent days sitting on my bed and pouring over those two books and making characters. Unfortunately, the other kids in my neighborhood were more about football and stealing beer from the fridge than they were playing something like D&D. I wouldn't mind a gaming group until I got to high school, years later. That was more in the 2E era but I still managed to run a BECMI campaign.
My favorite things to add for BECMI were making druids available from level one and adding the Wood Elf class, which was a fighter/druid. Normal elves became the High Elves.
The current ordering of Ability scores, grouping them into Physical & Mental, goes all the way back to 2e AD&D. The first AD&D and Basic (both BX and BECMI, which are 99% the same) use the classical order of the original game. This order was based, I think, on the prime requisites of the original character classes. STR (Fighting-Man), INT (Magic-User), and WIS (Cleric). These are also the only scores you can lower in order to improve a Prime Requisite.
BECMI always felt like adventuring in the 4th Age of Middle Earth where Elves, Dwarves and Hob- er...Halflings were rare to come across. We didn't play much beyond Expert. Even when most of us tried out AD&D up to 3e we still grouped for Expert games. This is why I love systems like 5 Torches Deep and Knave. Your scores weren't as important as your ability to strategize. While there was plenty of hack-n-slash in our games, all hail the dungeon crawl, our DMs were fair if we the players weren't careless or rambunctious. Oh yeah, battle maps/mats didn't exist in our games. We used miniatures to show marching order or who was fighting near to whom, mostly for spells that required touch as a range.
There's something about the feel of old school D&D that newer systems have lost. I struggle to get across what that is to people who've never played it. Part of it is that the system doesn't care about you, it doesn't care about your success or failure. It doesn't exist to make sure your character has every chance to survive. Its gritty and raw, just like the old books were. If you succeed, its because you've been smart, good, and lucky. Its never unfair, but old D&D punishes poor decisions, where modern D&D gives you many tools as parts of the ruleset to dig yourself out of every situation, no matter how bleak, or how much the party deserves to be in it. I've only briefly dabbled in basic D&D. Years ago as a young teen I bought the Escape From Zanzer's Dungeon box set and tried to get everyone I knew to play it. A short time later I got my first D&D book, the 2nd ed AD&D DMG and never looked back. I'll admit to always having had a curiosity about playing basic though. This channel awoke that curiosity in me again, so I grabbed the Rules Cyclopedia. An hour went by without me noticing, just taking in the sheer nostalgia. The only quibble I have is the idea that old D&D systems are more conducive to role playing than the newer systems. I really believe that's entirely up to who your players are and what a DM's expectation are for them. I would never accept a player giving me a simple backstory, whether its in 5th or 2nd ed. 5th does have preset backgrounds, but they're starting points, and I tend to work with players at customizing them to meet their vision. At the same time, I've been part of some real beer and pretzel 2nd ed games in the mists of time that consisted of "make characters in 5 minutes, spend 5 hours kicking down dungeon doors and killing monsters." Good players can roleplay well under any system. Unmotivated players who are only interested in combat and refuse to use the tools at their fingertips to play a larger game will be that way under any system.
I played AD&D, 5e, but actually i started with Rolemaster for long years. I think there are 3 major factors at play here: 1. Streamlining of rules: Old systems are a collection of cobbled together systems that behave all in their own way. Different progression, granularity and even how rolls work (mix of low vs high rolls are good). Modern systems have streamlined that into unified systems that behave the same if the same concept is used. For example: High rolls are always good, boni are added, etc. I very much appreciate the consistency and simplicity of modern systems, but that is something that takes many iterations to get right, wich obviously early systems didn't have. 2. Grittyness/Deadlyness: Older systems assume that characters will die, and death is everywhere. Rolemaster has crit tables, and almost all hits do some level of crit. Every crit table has some chance of outright killing a character. We had a farmer with a fork kill an experienced character in a lucky strike. Things like that make fights very exciting and intense, as every hit counts. 3. Modularity: Modern systems allow you to combine classes, features and races in a modular way to build exactly the character you want. See all the rebuilds of iconic characters from movies etc. I think Old School rulesets make a mistake by intentionally inheriting the mess described in point 1. There is no reason to not use decades of experience and streamline the system. The mess is not what makes those games feel good or rewarding. A modern iteration of the old school rules that streamlines those rules but honors the spirit would be much better. I think point 2 is the main factor. You don't get Murderhobos in old school systems, because unnecessary fights get you killed very quickly. All the weird excesses from cuddling characters and making them too powerful and near immortal would go away. I think the spirit of the old game is found here. Point 3 is the one I am undecided about. I like the modularity and reflecting the uniqueness of characters in their abilities. It is also a part of streamlining the rules and making things logical and seamless. On the other hand, this invites min-maxing and preplanning the whole character for levels they will have in months or years and then chasing after this idea. Maybe it would be a nice idea to keep the modularity, but limit the options you can choose similar to roguelike games: You only get a random set of options to choose from, not necessarily what you planned out. You would still get unique and personalized characters, but the preplanning would go away and the min-maxing would be limited to making a good decision when you get your level up and decide what teacher to learn from. If we could manage to distill the spirit of the old games but package them in a modern streamlined and logical system, I think that would make it much easier for new players to get into that style of game.
I have a question about roleplaying in older, more ruthless... Funnel type systems. How do you actually immerse yourself into a character who could easily die at any time, who could easily be your 2nd or 3rd character that month? A theoretical threat of death is good, it brings tension and excitement... But it's incredibly easy to swing the pendulum too far in that direction for me personally. If I don't feel comfortable investing myself into the identity of a character, feel reasonably assured that they're probably not going to die... It's just such an anxiety flooded ulcer inducing experience that's not worth participating in. For me personally
@@priestesslucy3299 The short answer is: New characters die often, but after a certain amount of levels ressurection magic becomes available. Old characters often retire and become powerful NPCs in the lore, making that achivement immortal. The risk is higher or at least feels higher. It is still not a game of throw-away characters.
@@priestesslucy3299 I'll take a stab at answering that one. I've never had characters die that rapidly. I've had campaigns where I've lost 2 or 3 characters, and it can be a tough adjustment. But I feel that if players are being careful, are actually taking precautions and not jumping into every fight and realize that running is very much an option they'll be fine. Past the sadness I feel a kind of excitement when a character does die, because I get to tell a new story now, and play something entirely different. The other end of responsibility is on the DM. They need to design their games in such a way that they're tough and rewarding, but not overpowering. Older D&D isn't a "roguelike" game where losing is fun. Especially not if you feel what happened was unfair. So when I say I like games gritty and dirty, I also want them to be fair. If a character dies, you should feel like it was your fault and fair.
I started playing around 81 or 82, and what became BECMI were the rules I learned. Its still my favorite system. I like the simplicity of the system, especially combat encounters. I like the Rules Cyclopedia's optional rules that allow Demis to raise up to 36 level. They get a little nerfed, but it works. The Creatures Crucible series was an excellent addition.
I started playing in the 90s thanks to the parents of a good friend of mine who run a BECMI Module for his birthday party. It also became my favourite system, after returning to it's simplicity some years ago. I even sold my 5E books because i don't feel the urge to ever touch another version of D&D ever again. This video imo is amazing and a pretty well collected pool of knowledge about my most loved TTRPG system. You did a very great job! The order of the attributes was chosen because (just as the video already tells) you where supposed to roll your stats from top to bottom. Therefore you where able to see what kind of character you can play but the tension stays to the last moment where your hitpoints and leadership qualities (CON/CHA) where rolled for in the very end. Because of that, many people didn't "trashed" their character away just because of a bad CON/CHA roll but instead realy started to concider playing somebody with low CON or CHA because of their very high roles in the other stats. Over the years more and more people instead rolled their stats first and then move them around, which is why the top-to-bottom order became kind of useless but if you go by the raw books straight 3d6 top-to-bottom, it actually has some kind of use. One of the greatest things i can say about BECMI (and Basic in general) is the high player mortality. It leads to much smarter actions, stealth, carefully searching rooms and doors and trying to avoid as much traps and enemies as possible. In the end XP mostly where gained by gathering treasures (as the video already tells) and not by slaying monsters. So there's no point in picking random fights and getting into combat was always (especially on low levels) a very dangerous thing that needs to be avoided as good as possible. Combat was often the last option. Negotiating with, or even surrendering to dangerous opponents was normal and quite necessary because in BECMI you're a normal dude who maybe one day will become a legendary hero, not an out-of-the-box Action- or even Superhero like the WotC-D&D characters (3rd Edition and all the stuff that followed).
Agree with all of that! I’ll be doing a video on how gameplay at my table changed between BECMI and 5th edition, but you’ve touched on a lot of the points I’ll be raising. Thanks for commenting.
The Vancian System is actually in 5E, as the spells per level memorized appear on the level advancement charts on spellcaster characters. 4E introduced a bare-bones version of it with the number of total powers known for at will/encounter/daily/utility on a unified table for all class advancements. 5E actually brought the Vancian System back, with spells slots per level, but is the same system.
BECMI was probably my favorite edition, but that could be due to the mystery associated with my age at the time (8) and nostalgia. I actually started just after Christmas 1978 with the Holmes edition (2nd printing). We were lucky to have dice as just after we received out box, the new boxes started coming with the terrible chits. I am surprised I stuck with D&D considering how bad my initial experience was. My buddy's dad was our DM and he was hard core. We had to remember to stop to eat, drink, and rest or we would get exhausted. We had to track every single item in our limited inventory. We rolled 3d6 down the line for our ability scores and my very first character only had one score higher than '8', which was a 9 in Dexterity. This mean I had to play a thief, and a bad one at that. I would have been able to reroll if I didn't qualify for any character, but since that 9 qualified me for thief, my DM required I keep it. With my dagger, I was almost useless in combat generally missing my attack and usually only inflicting 1 point of damage when I was lucky enough to hit the enemy. My thief skills were also poor and turned out to be his demise when we were captured by orcs. Our guard fell asleep and I tried to steal the key to our shackles. Of course, I failed, he woke up and killed me. For most kids, that would have been the end of D&D. I mean who wants to play a game that was so unfun? But, somehow, my infatuation with the idea of playing my favorite fantasy heroes if I could roll better, kept me in and I've been a dedicated RPG'er ever since. I wish I could find a few people, my wife included, willing to play BECMI, but they did not start with the basic rules and therefore consider them "bad." I have to accept 5E as our default system, though I still use some pieces of basic D&D in my house rules, and certainly steal from the old skool adventure modules. I mean who doesn't LOVE keep on the borderlands. I love using Hommlet as my campaign's base of operations and the PCs venturing out from there into the caves of chaos or the silver princess's palace or perhaps the cynidicean pyramid.
I started with the Holmes edition. I had lost chits all over my bedroom. I was 12. I remember wincing at seeing the dice in the store, knowing I couldn't afford it for awhile, but one day got some money from my parents so I could get that flimsy and brittle set of dice. I'm sure you did too and had that black grease crayon so that you could fill in the engraved numbers and then wipe off the excess for readability of the numbers. I had damn good eyesight but a person could go blind trying to read those dice.
I really love BECMI as it originally started as a means to collate several booklets into a coherent, understandable ruleset - the OG Holmes Dungeons and Dragons publication - then developed into the Mentzer editions with the Rules Cyclopedia again collated into that volume as you've said. Great video - I personally use BFRPG (and OSRIC) - but was an 80s BECMI kid. Will always love this style of D&D.
I was playing old school essentials with some friends and this really helped instill the old school ethos in me. As someone who only played modern games this introduction is clear and concise and greatly appreciated Berserker!
I am a huge BECMI fan... Its the only D&D I play. Mystara is always my go-to world, but having played for decades I wander the multiverse with impunity.
The Basic boxed set was the first D&D product I ever owned, and I still have a soft spot for BECMI because of that. Even though, I never got to actually play D&D until 97 with 2nd edition. There are a handful of things I'd change running it, but the majority of it is a very solid and workable system, and it is far more cohesive than AD&D.
This brings back some memories. I remember the Rules Cyclopedia but I first started D&D when it came in a black box in toy stores and came with hole-punched cards for a solo+initial adventure ("Zanzer's Dungeon" IIRC it was). I had played 1st and 2nd AD&D, 3.5, and 4e and I'm looking at trying to get back into D&D, but I can't quite decide which version.
Even at the tender age of 16 we worked out how to create demi human classes by drawing Human fighter vs dwarven fighter vs Hin fighter xp and working it out from there. We had dwarf clerics before Rockhome was even released. Also stopped giving out treasure xp after the very first campaign.
This brings back so many memories. Good ones mostly but ultimately I also understand why BECMI times are over for me. The system just wasn't refined enough for the long haul (at least for me). I've always preferred skill based systems, after a few month of playing BECMI I was wondering why there were no rules or even suggestions how to implement skills. Then I found MERP and never looked back (except stroking the red box every other year and looking at old character sheets from the early 1980s, which I of course still keep in a little folder).
I started with Basic in the early 90s. Then I started playing AD&D. I love the Rules Cyclopedia. I picked up a print on demand fairly recently. It's not a perfect text, and I understand there are some minor rules variations from the BECMI format, but I have a renewed appreciation for it. I especially like rules that are more open to interpretation, and the idea that you dont need a specific class and subclass to carry out a character concept. I'm running a Dungeon Crawl Classics game as of late, which really is a love letter to Basic D&D.
Great video, a few caveats and clarifications: As BECMI and the Cyclopedia are prohibitively expensive on the 3rd party market, and I personally don't want to see WotC get another dime, I must recommend the OSR retroclone Dark Dungeons in it's stead. It's a free PDF and at-cost hardbound (around $27, damn inflation) from Lulu which is essentially a revised Rules Cyclopedia (as there were a LOT of errors in that book) with all the options presented as well as a chapter on Immortality. The RC itself didn't include Immortals rules initially, it came out in a separate box set (Wrath of the Immortals) and IIRC was heavily changed from the original Immortals box set. Dark Dungeons is more BECMI than BECMI, IMHO. Icing on the cake is that the minor amount of fluff text there is takes the piss out of the Jack Chick tract. On Ability Score bonuses: Actually only B/X and BECMI(/RC) had the same bonus schema (topping out at +3 to rolls). OD&D had an entirely different schema along with Holmes Basic (both topped out at +1 to rolls). The two iterations of AD&D had marginal differences in how they handled ability score bonuses (but both were much more granular than the earlier and basic editions). On Saving Throws: The original saving throw is a completely lost element of the game. The Poison save for example SUBVERTS Constitution. It doesn't matter how tough you are, the only thing that matters is your class of hero and level of experience when it comes to surviving a poison attack. This wasn't by accident. This entire class of vulnerability was discarded with the old saves. Another thing I've seen mentioned but we never really played that way but now I'm very keen on (it was a cause of many arguments) was that the Saving Throws order was important. A wand of paralysis would cause a save vs wands as it's higher on the list than paralysis, while a rod of paralysis elicits a paralysis save as it's further up the list than Rods. Rods and staves and spells sat at the bottom of the list as sort of baseline originators of spells. It also makes Wands special (and weaker) than they otherwise would be.
Regarding the issue of ability scores order, the newer versions grouped the physical stats (strength, dexterity, constitution) together, separate from the mental stats (intelligence, wisdom, charisma).
I recently ran a one shot! Everyone had a great time, but it's hard to make schedules work on a consistent basis. I would love to run another BECMI session.
Thanks for doing this series. An old grognard, I've played all the D&D versions. They all have their strengths and weaknesses, and great ideas can be mined from them all. I tend to skew toward rules light systems these days, but the old boxed set basic game has so much to recommend it in terms of concept.
BECMI is as simple or as complex as you want. I think the sweet spot is basic/expert with a sprinkling of companion and master rules and monsters for spice.
BECMI was the game I played in the main during the 80s with a bunch of 1e “chrome” before finally moving onto 1e permanently. I still have all my original box sets. Fond memories.
I watched a video 🎉. The ability scores where regrouped to make more sense. STR DEX CON is considered body; INT WIS CHA is considered soul or mind. Thanks for the video you have a wonderful day!
Having begun playing D&D in 1975 with 1974 booklets, I still think of D&D as that game with addition of Greyhawk - perhaps best introduction to which is D&D 1977 by Eric Holmes. If in 1981, with release of B/X &/or AD&D you were to tell me I was playing 'basic' D&D or not playing D&D at all, I would laugh. Please do not try to convince me 'psionic mystics & half-orc ninja' is real D&D.
I really enjoyed this look at BECMI. I started with AD&D 1E and stuck with AD&D 2E. I just never could wrap my head around a race being the class as well. That's why I never played OD&D. Keep up the good work.
I've come to really like race as class it's a great idea for encouraging role-playing other races as actual mythical races and not humans with pointy ears. It also allows races to really stand out differently than the average human it's a really good way to do alot of settings as well. Great video regardless will look over tye system perhaps a few ideas I can stick into my homebrew
Old school goodness. Where you became a hero and didn't start out as a superhero. When the question came from the DM about what do you want to do? The answer was very very rairly ever on your character sheet.
I sincerely appreciate your Channel and the Tremendous amount of Information provided, and Perspective, as there are plenty of things I'll be dredging up from BECMI and AD&D, to aid in my 3rd Edition Games
I moved back to 3.5, took a side step to Pathfinder 1e, and took a step forward to P2e, but I am always looking for new and wonderful systems. Thank you for this video
Ironically I picked up some Castles and Crusades books because I've always been an AD&D 1E/ 2E holdout for my games. I was willing to give C&C a try but didn't end up liking it as much as I wanted to at the start. While reading in the back of the C&C PHB I ran across something I thought was fairly profound; there are 4 basic character classes. Fighter, rogue, divine magic user, and magic user. I was thinking this was something particularly clever, like they'd really put their finger on the pulse of character archetypes, but realized with the help of your videos that this is what BECMI had all along (with demihumans alongside of course). The more I learn about BECMI the more I am enjoying it - and lamenting the things that did not make the cut when moving to AD&D 1E (the vibrant character class progression system being at the top of that list). Bespoke stat scaling modifiers, and more/ different character classes in books like Unearthed Arcana seemed to be a replacement for the BECMI system that had a very intuitive path for advancement and maturation (and encouraged deeper play). As soon as I figure out multiclassing and separating race/ class I'll be happily bolting on the NWP/ proficiency system and running a BECMI/1E mashup.
Old rules do everything I need. Move-attack-repeat. Then go do something else like talking to an npc or making a real decision. Because I so so so don't care whether someone is allowed to invoke intransigence as part of their secondary left-handed alternative second breakfast bonus action of opportunity. They're just hitting an orc. Just roll. The roll gets easier as your level goes up. Done.
I always justify xp for treasure as representative of the traps, puzzle solving, and critical thinking you had to go through to get there, without forcing the DM to jump through hoops of a complex system to calculate xp for each thing, or forcing the DM to make a judgment call about how challenging each obstacle was - the players may have a different opinion!
I am a comparatively young adventurer (I predate the Rules Cyclopedia by a year or two I think), and started in 3.5. However, the old ways have always interested me, especially BECMI. I have been collecting the the PDFs for a while through the DM'S Guild, but only just recently got the Print on Demand version of the Rules Cyclopedia, and I suggest heavily to anyone coming to BECMI to go for the physical book!
If you haven't got your old books or are too young to have gotten them, go get a copy of the Rules Cyclopedia (yeah I know no immortal rules but they weren't much use to start off with) be it print on demand or pdf. You'll never have to get another book, within six months of playing around you won't need third party content either, you'll be making your own things up. Monsters, worlds, races, classes. Plus if you want to add classes to the demihumans the RC tells you how in the back of the book as well as how to take them up to 36th (which we did a few times). You can, if you read through the book and understand the behind the screen stuff, there is nothing you can't do or have in BECMI that you could have in ad&d. Or not, it's that easy and the greatness of the system, you use all or none of what you want without it breaking the game.
What I started with was the basic red box set and then every edition of D&D (except 4th) thereafter. I am going to start a new BECMI game and just picked up the Old School Essential books (Advanced, which is not AD&D but has some additional options that are derived from AD&D for the basic D&D game). We are going to start straight out Basic red box set and open up the options as new character options, rewards and achievements as games progress with the materials from OSE. The system is fast paced and deadly, but the intensity level is definitely higher than the feel of 5e. Which characters tend to be a lot stronger and survivability much easier. It's a good change of pace from the usual to go back and very nostalgic. Great for one (or few) shot sessions too, as characters are quick and easy to create.
I think the answer to "I want more" from the Old School is that in the Old School it's super easy to make "more." I remember playing DnD with my father back in the day, he was playing the brown books when they first turned up and played every edition through 2e, and we'd make stuff up all the time. I played a Jedi once, and had a crash-landed Predator (as in AvP) with a bunch of busted equipment in another game. We made up spells and magic items and used Arduin to roll quirks and "special traits" for characters ("tastes bad to monsters!"). It's actually easier in the Old School to have a unique character, because when you say you want to play a "tiefling" and there are no rules for it, you actually have to talk to your DM and explain what you want from it. Without a strict category, the limits are was open as your imagination.
Love this! It touches on my previous comments about 5e being a house of cards. In old school you don’t have to worry about whether an ability is going to nerf some other rule somewhere, you can wing it knowing it will work. Anything too powerful will quickly be obvious and can be dealt with. Great comment. Thank you.
I was born after the millennium. From my outsider's perspective you really have to be a certain type of person (which may rhyme with bosser) to say that 2nd edition is not old school enough. I'm probably sticking to OSR and Genesys but this journey back in time is very interesting. I see a lot I like and a few things that I would absolutely houserule or look for a fork that does things differently.
I rarely open my boxed sets anymore. I love them, but trying to find stuff is a lot harder than using the RC. They’ll always have a special place in my heart though.
Honestly I'm more and more tempted to create an old school D&D'esq game that sheds the clunkyness of AD&D (thaco etc.) while keeping true to the spirit of the game.
You actually can play as a demihuman with a human class. There are loose guidelines for it on page 293 of the Rules Cyclopedia. I've never tried them so I'm not sure if they work well. From your demi-human class, you get to keep "racial abilities", which I assume means things like goul-immunity, superior hearing, stone-cunning, infravision, and the halfling's AC, initiative, and ranged weapon bonuses. You also keep your level-limit from your demi-human class, and it says "rank abilities are gained normally", which I interpret as attack bonuses increasing at the same rate, gaining extra attacks, and those saving throw bonuses. Everything else is as the regular class. I think if I ever wanted to play a half-elf I'd ask my DM if I could use these rules. I'd be losing out on the elf's fighter/mage combo, but I guess I wouldn't really mind, especially since I'd reach level 2 much faster.
i use to own basic, expert and the rules cyclopedia. i miss those books and would play them again in a heart beat. as well advanced. i still love those books. truth is i also love 3rd as well which i is my last D&D i ever bought.
The Print on demand copy of the Rules Cyclopedia, from DriveThruRpg is great. I can vouch for the quality, having gotten mine a few months ago. Can't tell it's a re-print from the original, other than it's a thicker book and has a tan/white border around the cover. Recommend, if you are looking to replace your old copy 🤘
Just today I did a drive through with some friends of the BF rules etc. The comments were all positive. Things like it is easier, when building a character it seems to come to life on its own, and I know everything I am carrying now. 🤣
7:00 - I can actually explain this one. The reason the old ability scores were listed differently from modern day is that this is the order in which they were invented. Strength to differentiate a barely functional Fighting Man from an outstanding one, Intelligence for Magic Users, Wisdom for Clerics. Elves needed both Strength and Intelligence as they were Fighting Men and Magic Users at the same time. In the earliest days, nobody but a Fighter is hindered by sub average Strength because only the Fighter reaps benefits of high Strength in the first place, nobody but a mage needs Intelligence, and nobody but clerics need Wisdom. Dexterity to help with missile weapons and armor class (later, the Thief glommed onto this stat that's actually for everybody). Constitution to help with durability in the forms of Hit Points and Saving Throws. Charisma to interact with NPC morale and manage your army of helpers, which you absolutely need in this edition especially if you're a Fighting Man. In later editions, these were re-organized to put the physical aptitudes in one orderly segment and the mental ones in another, and the rules for each ability score were expanded to help everyone even if a wizard is considerably _less_ helped by strength and a warrior _less_ by intelligence.
i first played the basic box set, and have played all th versions apart from 4e, all our group loved AD&D 2e Skills and Powers books, however we stuck with Pathfinder 1e, but might try Pathfinder 2e, but as compatability, as a DM I still use a lot of my D&D and AD&D rules, and adventures.
I recently discovered Hyperborea 3rd edition and it’s a great system/world/game. My only complaint is that it sucks getting the books if you’re outside the states (Canadian here).
One note: the rules were in different scope - but also there were NEW elements of rules you were now ready for. The Red “Basic” or Blue “Expert” in BECMI was not all the rules that apply to those levels - there were rules you got later where you apply them to those early tiers. To get all the rules that apply to level 1-3, you needed more, the “Basic and Expert” sets were like the “SRD” - and little of Mystara and the expansive rules you would be ready for as you learn more. You were not playing one character and were encouraged to start and play new characters. There are some major issues with saying the Rules Cyclopedia is a game inpprovement. It was deal reference to make it easy to find things- but they screwed up the thief.
Oh man, the memories. Still love the old system (but still dislike THACO). I totally forgot about xp percentage bonus. Without a doubt, I never had more deaths in my campaigns then in BECMI for my players. I do hope after the boxes sets that you delve into the excellent Gazetteer books. They are what kept me playing BECMI into the 90s before I moved to 3rd Ed.
It sounds like, to run this properly coming from lots of 5E experience as a DM, the group would call for rolls only when it was agreed necessary. Example being, your character is known for being good at 'x', so most of the time we just assume they succeed at 'x', but when you want to attempt something using 'x' that seems more difficult than usual you would roll for it. Yell at me if I'm not quite getting it. It just seems like with a system like this if you rolled for as much stuff as we do in 5E, the game would descend into chaos very quickly unless the players really had their shit together and were avoiding rolls like the plague. For added context, I ran a fairly mean 5E game that tended to kill characters that went off on their own too often. Usually, if the party stayed together, they could be okay in most situations (though there were still plenty of close calls). I just had these players that have their characters linger behind or wander off alone, get a little unlucky and die...that's all it takes sometimes. That said, heroic deaths did also occur. There's a statue in a town dedicated to a former character of one of my campaigns for that very reason. Let's just say, their feats of heroism were very poignantly and gruesomely witnessed by the party and the refugees they saved with their actions. The system itself never felt like it was holding me back from running a challenging game, though, the death saves and healing abundance were definitely a contentious issue for me. I tried getting a group to play with the adjusted rules suggestions for long rests and such, but they felt it would be too punishing. To me, the change of a mechanic like that is just an adjustment of expectations overall. I will always find the fun. I think it's just harder for most people to be receptive to alternative play when they have already acquired a set of expectations over time from their consumption of streamed games and their own previous experiences (and often don't want to at all, people really resist change). It's baggage. It's media saturation baggage, really. I think I'd love to run something like BECMI, but I have literally no idea how to pitch it in a way that makes it sound appealing to anyone I know. I suspect I'd have to find people or a group that already knows they like it.
Thanks for commenting. I know it may seem like it might descend into chaos if you come from a more…erm…structured system like 5e, but it really isn’t like that. For instance, if you wanted to do something, you’d raise it with the DM, who would weigh up whether it would be possible given the circumstances. What becomes interesting is that the other players can police the circumstances as well, such as agreeing or disagreeing whether something might be possible, which is usually good natured. The DM has final say of course. It’s not as convoluted as it sounds, I promise, and can make from some really interesting “solutions” for the players to come up with, given their thinking is not constrained to a list of skills. I hope you give it a try one day.
@@becmiberserker Oh no, you misunderstood what I was implying, I think. I was speculating that it could descend into chaos IF you tried to play it like 5E with as many rolls taking place as typically does in that system. So, I imagined doing pretty much exactly what you described, instead, because that's the only natural alternative I can see.
becmi was great for starting into this hobby. while I like Ad&d I prefer 2nd edition with carry overs rules from 1st. i stopped buying after third edition was released. and to this day refuse to play anything beyond second edition. sadly i have few friends who wish to play anymore. and that is ok. i have other systems i enjoy.
11:34 saving throws are different systems but I don’t think one is better than the other. In older editions saving throws are linked to your class while 5e it’s based on your ability score. How is this different practically (or thematically)? In 5e when you make a DEX save it ALWAYS assumes you are dodging the dragon’s breath weapon, while in BECMI a wizard would raise a magical shield, a warrior would use his metal shield etc. More room for narrative. Also, saves, like everything else in OSR games (including BECMI here) it’s all linked to level as the most important progression path.
I was actually going to ask if you would do a series on BECMI. This is great! I am planning to run Castles & Crusades for some friends, as it's closer to what BECMI was, but has a touch of 3e and up to satisfy the players enough to try it, but I am also going to run a family game of BECMI. By far, my favorite. Do you happen to know if the PDF's of the red and blue BECMI books on DriveThruRpg are any good? I got the pod of Rules Cyclopedia a few months ago, and it's really good. But, I'd like to get the basic and expert books, as I only have the Norwegian translations. Was lucky enough to get the companion and master boxes in English. Anyway, keep up the good work, and I look forward to more BECMI videos 🤘 Ps: the lack of ambient music was no issue, for me at least. Sometimes, it can muddle speech or distract. Hasn't been an issue so far though 🤘 Happy New Year to you and everyone involved in the comment section. May 2023 be a prosperous and wonderful year for you all!
Thanks for the kind words. I can’t speak for the quality of the boxed set PDFs. There may be reviews on the site. Thanks for watching and please share with your BECMI mates. To be course and vulgar, I need all the subscriptions I can get. 🙂
@@becmiberserker Oh, I already have 🤘 Btw, have you checked out The Dungeon Minister? He's running BECMI for his family and goes over their sessions. Fun watch and I highly recommend it.
I love BECMI, especially the game world and adventures created for it. But there are a few game mechanics and limitations I never want to go back to: THAC0, descending AC, race-as-class, weak magic-users at low level, and the comparatively thin spell lists.
The only thing “basic” about BECMI was the unfortunate name from the first boxed set. It was wise enough to teach you how to play first, then expanded on the rules as you needed them. A far more agreeable process than to bury you in every rule you could possibly need (which is half of why Gygax made the 1st edition, due to rules scamming tournament players) Then not even bother to teach you how to play. BECMI continued expanding with far more than most players would ever need whereas subsequent editions,continuing to this day, didn’t even bother. Then BECMI went on to put almost its entirety in one 300 page book. The common assumption of thinking it was a lesser game is grossly inaccurate. It wasn’t “Basic D&D”, it was just D&D. Same as it had been for the previous decade. I often think of what D&D might have become if the Dave vs Gary rift had never happened. Alas we may have actually had… BECMI Forever! Long Live King Elmore!!
The only thing I take issue with in this video is that you seem to think 'Character Growth' and 'Character Build' are seperate, when in fact the build is just a greater expression of how your character progresses as a person, storytelling comes from the mechanics and mechanics come from the storytelling, tabletop should be less like a clash between the game and the story and more like a harmony of it. I will say as a 3.5 purist you've painted BECMI as something of incredible value, I can at least see why you'd want to play this edition over another. The same can't be said for 5e...
QUESTION: I own the hard copy of Basic Rules by Tom Moldvay and Expert Rules by David Cook & Steve Marsh. Are these compatible with BECMI Frank Mentzer rules??? I'm not over excited about purchasing the D&D Rules Cyclopedia. BUT purchasing those Basic & Expert rules by him wouldn't be terrible if required for continuity.
Entirely compatible. There is little discernible difference at all unless you go looking for them. The biggest is the change in Thief skill scaling, as BECMI made it to publishing up to 36th level. Otherwise, you’ll have no issue.
Thank you. I find your vidieos on the BEDMI VERY educational and would like many more. I know you said you feel they are long, and younger viewer most like follow that perspective. I do not. I want to learn much more about these. I came from D&D white box set back around 1977. Then bought the AD&D rule books because of Elsie on the ad for the Monster Manual in 1979? A very dumb choice, as I felt the books were a better buy vs a "small" box set of which I owned, as I said, the previous White Box of three little books. Unware at the time that once you bought the DMG, you then needed the Players Book. Then the Monster Manual. And so on down the rabbit hole I went. If I would have gone with the Basic Box set, then I would have learned about the Expert rules, and so on. Ultimently, being a better DM back in this long lost age! LOL. No. I wasn't terrible. But I did not feel I grasped Gary Gygax's AD&D rules, any more than those three little books I had. And, I even talked to him because of those issues (which he learned up some, others he himself did not seem to know how to convey understanding). Today, I hope to find players wanting to go this route, as I believe as you do. The new rules (3rd edition and up) have become a money maker, and too damn complicated. A coworker gave me some of those 5th edition rules in hopes I'd run them BUT I felt I was returning to college!!! Again, thanks for your response. @@becmiberserker
@@kellyjeaularson5786You are more than welcome. My first ever video speaks about a similar journey. I can’t look at 5th edition now without thinking it’s a card game disguised as an RPG - I mention this in my reasons for leaving 5e video. Anyway, glad to steer you away from all that back to a simpler way. 👍
Is it fair to say the full breadth of the BECMI system could answer the question “B/X is fine and all, but I do eventually want to play a god or powerful character?” Is it the original answer to high level play, using the simplicity of the B/X framework? I love B/X and don’t find super heroes interesting, but often get asked “if not 5e (supers) then what?”
I think it is! I mean, the systems are close enough to almost be the same. If you play B/X and want to push beyond Expert then BECMI might be what you’re looking for.
Being someone who started with 3.5e, the thac0 system is alien to me 😅 For example, the old Icewind Dale pc game was confusing, but Neverwinter Nights clicked immediately.
I find it really strange when people say the THAC0 system was odd. 🙂 I found it really simple, but I guess it was how I learned the game. In essence, if you need an 18 To Hit AC0, then it follows that you’ll need an 11 to hit AC7, or a 19 to hit AC-1. You probably know this, so apologies if I geeked out a little. 🙂
I forgot to add ambient music to this one. Hopefully you don’t mind too much.
i kinda prefer videos without music but thats just me
Love the music in videos, but the info was so spot on that I didn’t mind. Love this video! Many thanks
No problem
I actually preferred it.
English accents still count
Ability Scores are listed STR, INT, WIS first as these are the primary stats for the classes Fighting Man, Magic User and Cleric. Then DEX, CON, CHA are the secondary stats that support those three. It has to do with a Offensive-Support pairing of stats for classes. DEX should be 5th slot, but because of the Thief class it is lumped in with the primary abilities. This allows a player to compare primary ability score to select the best class, then compare support ability scores in the event of a tie.
This was fascinating. Thank you.
Yep! Whereas later WotC editions rearranged them into the order of physical then mental stats.
I'm not sure why DEX should be 5th, could you please expand on that? Fascinating!
@@krunchyfrogg So each class had a pair of stats that were most important. Fighting Man needed (STR, CON), Magic-User (INT, DEX ), Cleric (WIS, CHA), because those stats impacted those classes the most. So the stats were grouped primary (STR, INT, WIS) and support (CON, DEX, CHA) as this matched the FM, MU, C class list. After Thief was introduced, DEX became a primary, it moved up to 4th slot.
Oh ok! I get it! I started with BECMI, and later learned that, in OD&D, the thief class was added later. I figured out the reason of the order to the first 4 stats was because of the classes, but I didn’t ever think about the order of CON/CHA.
Thank you!
As a Player and DM that started with the 1974/75 rules (OD&D), plus Chainmail, plus Moldvay, and AD&D 1e, and BECMI, and have to say you’re doing a great job with your videos.
Thank you. Please subscribe if you haven’t already. They take a lot of time.
I started with Moldvay - my mother bought it for me, a decision she regrets to this day :P
I'll never forget opening the Basic red box, and seeing an RPG for the first time. Nowadays, the RC is my rule book of choice, but I still love the red box!
Oh man, me too. I spent days sitting on my bed and pouring over those two books and making characters. Unfortunately, the other kids in my neighborhood were more about football and stealing beer from the fridge than they were playing something like D&D. I wouldn't mind a gaming group until I got to high school, years later. That was more in the 2E era but I still managed to run a BECMI campaign.
My favorite things to add for BECMI were making druids available from level one and adding the Wood Elf class, which was a fighter/druid. Normal elves became the High Elves.
The current ordering of Ability scores, grouping them into Physical & Mental, goes all the way back to 2e AD&D. The first AD&D and Basic (both BX and BECMI, which are 99% the same) use the classical order of the original game. This order was based, I think, on the prime requisites of the original character classes. STR (Fighting-Man), INT (Magic-User), and WIS (Cleric). These are also the only scores you can lower in order to improve a Prime Requisite.
BECMI always felt like adventuring in the 4th Age of Middle Earth where Elves, Dwarves and Hob- er...Halflings were rare to come across. We didn't play much beyond Expert. Even when most of us tried out AD&D up to 3e we still grouped for Expert games. This is why I love systems like 5 Torches Deep and Knave. Your scores weren't as important as your ability to strategize. While there was plenty of hack-n-slash in our games, all hail the dungeon crawl, our DMs were fair if we the players weren't careless or rambunctious. Oh yeah, battle maps/mats didn't exist in our games. We used miniatures to show marching order or who was fighting near to whom, mostly for spells that required touch as a range.
There's something about the feel of old school D&D that newer systems have lost. I struggle to get across what that is to people who've never played it. Part of it is that the system doesn't care about you, it doesn't care about your success or failure. It doesn't exist to make sure your character has every chance to survive. Its gritty and raw, just like the old books were. If you succeed, its because you've been smart, good, and lucky. Its never unfair, but old D&D punishes poor decisions, where modern D&D gives you many tools as parts of the ruleset to dig yourself out of every situation, no matter how bleak, or how much the party deserves to be in it.
I've only briefly dabbled in basic D&D. Years ago as a young teen I bought the Escape From Zanzer's Dungeon box set and tried to get everyone I knew to play it. A short time later I got my first D&D book, the 2nd ed AD&D DMG and never looked back. I'll admit to always having had a curiosity about playing basic though. This channel awoke that curiosity in me again, so I grabbed the Rules Cyclopedia. An hour went by without me noticing, just taking in the sheer nostalgia.
The only quibble I have is the idea that old D&D systems are more conducive to role playing than the newer systems. I really believe that's entirely up to who your players are and what a DM's expectation are for them. I would never accept a player giving me a simple backstory, whether its in 5th or 2nd ed. 5th does have preset backgrounds, but they're starting points, and I tend to work with players at customizing them to meet their vision. At the same time, I've been part of some real beer and pretzel 2nd ed games in the mists of time that consisted of "make characters in 5 minutes, spend 5 hours kicking down dungeon doors and killing monsters." Good players can roleplay well under any system. Unmotivated players who are only interested in combat and refuse to use the tools at their fingertips to play a larger game will be that way under any system.
This is a great comment. Thank you.
I played AD&D, 5e, but actually i started with Rolemaster for long years. I think there are 3 major factors at play here:
1. Streamlining of rules: Old systems are a collection of cobbled together systems that behave all in their own way. Different progression, granularity and even how rolls work (mix of low vs high rolls are good). Modern systems have streamlined that into unified systems that behave the same if the same concept is used. For example: High rolls are always good, boni are added, etc. I very much appreciate the consistency and simplicity of modern systems, but that is something that takes many iterations to get right, wich obviously early systems didn't have.
2. Grittyness/Deadlyness: Older systems assume that characters will die, and death is everywhere. Rolemaster has crit tables, and almost all hits do some level of crit. Every crit table has some chance of outright killing a character. We had a farmer with a fork kill an experienced character in a lucky strike. Things like that make fights very exciting and intense, as every hit counts.
3. Modularity: Modern systems allow you to combine classes, features and races in a modular way to build exactly the character you want. See all the rebuilds of iconic characters from movies etc.
I think Old School rulesets make a mistake by intentionally inheriting the mess described in point 1. There is no reason to not use decades of experience and streamline the system. The mess is not what makes those games feel good or rewarding. A modern iteration of the old school rules that streamlines those rules but honors the spirit would be much better.
I think point 2 is the main factor. You don't get Murderhobos in old school systems, because unnecessary fights get you killed very quickly. All the weird excesses from cuddling characters and making them too powerful and near immortal would go away. I think the spirit of the old game is found here.
Point 3 is the one I am undecided about. I like the modularity and reflecting the uniqueness of characters in their abilities. It is also a part of streamlining the rules and making things logical and seamless. On the other hand, this invites min-maxing and preplanning the whole character for levels they will have in months or years and then chasing after this idea. Maybe it would be a nice idea to keep the modularity, but limit the options you can choose similar to roguelike games: You only get a random set of options to choose from, not necessarily what you planned out. You would still get unique and personalized characters, but the preplanning would go away and the min-maxing would be limited to making a good decision when you get your level up and decide what teacher to learn from.
If we could manage to distill the spirit of the old games but package them in a modern streamlined and logical system, I think that would make it much easier for new players to get into that style of game.
I have a question about roleplaying in older, more ruthless... Funnel type systems.
How do you actually immerse yourself into a character who could easily die at any time, who could easily be your 2nd or 3rd character that month?
A theoretical threat of death is good, it brings tension and excitement... But it's incredibly easy to swing the pendulum too far in that direction for me personally.
If I don't feel comfortable investing myself into the identity of a character, feel reasonably assured that they're probably not going to die... It's just such an anxiety flooded ulcer inducing experience that's not worth participating in. For me personally
@@priestesslucy3299 The short answer is: New characters die often, but after a certain amount of levels ressurection magic becomes available. Old characters often retire and become powerful NPCs in the lore, making that achivement immortal. The risk is higher or at least feels higher. It is still not a game of throw-away characters.
@@priestesslucy3299 I'll take a stab at answering that one. I've never had characters die that rapidly. I've had campaigns where I've lost 2 or 3 characters, and it can be a tough adjustment. But I feel that if players are being careful, are actually taking precautions and not jumping into every fight and realize that running is very much an option they'll be fine. Past the sadness I feel a kind of excitement when a character does die, because I get to tell a new story now, and play something entirely different.
The other end of responsibility is on the DM. They need to design their games in such a way that they're tough and rewarding, but not overpowering. Older D&D isn't a "roguelike" game where losing is fun. Especially not if you feel what happened was unfair. So when I say I like games gritty and dirty, I also want them to be fair. If a character dies, you should feel like it was your fault and fair.
New subscriber. Hoping to see more BECMI videos in the new year.
Cheers!
More to come!
The Rules Cyclopedia has once again become the only book I need if I want to play "D&D"
I started playing around 81 or 82, and what became BECMI were the rules I learned. Its still my favorite system. I like the simplicity of the system, especially combat encounters.
I like the Rules Cyclopedia's optional rules that allow Demis to raise up to 36 level. They get a little nerfed, but it works.
The Creatures Crucible series was an excellent addition.
Higher 'levels' for Demi-humans first appeared in the Companion set in 1984.
That’s exactly when I was introduced to D&D as well. I’ve tried other versions but I keep coming back to BECMI. To me, it’s the true D&D.
I started playing in the 90s thanks to the parents of a good friend of mine who run a BECMI Module for his birthday party.
It also became my favourite system, after returning to it's simplicity some years ago. I even sold my 5E books because i don't feel the urge to ever touch another version of D&D ever again.
This video imo is amazing and a pretty well collected pool of knowledge about my most loved TTRPG system. You did a very great job!
The order of the attributes was chosen because (just as the video already tells) you where supposed to roll your stats from top to bottom. Therefore you where able to see what kind of character you can play but the tension stays to the last moment where your hitpoints and leadership qualities (CON/CHA) where rolled for in the very end. Because of that, many people didn't "trashed" their character away just because of a bad CON/CHA roll but instead realy started to concider playing somebody with low CON or CHA because of their very high roles in the other stats.
Over the years more and more people instead rolled their stats first and then move them around, which is why the top-to-bottom order became kind of useless but if you go by the raw books straight 3d6 top-to-bottom, it actually has some kind of use.
One of the greatest things i can say about BECMI (and Basic in general) is the high player mortality. It leads to much smarter actions, stealth, carefully searching rooms and doors and trying to avoid as much traps and enemies as possible. In the end XP mostly where gained by gathering treasures (as the video already tells) and not by slaying monsters. So there's no point in picking random fights and getting into combat was always (especially on low levels) a very dangerous thing that needs to be avoided as good as possible. Combat was often the last option.
Negotiating with, or even surrendering to dangerous opponents was normal and quite necessary because in BECMI you're a normal dude who maybe one day will become a legendary hero, not an out-of-the-box Action- or even Superhero like the WotC-D&D characters (3rd Edition and all the stuff that followed).
Agree with all of that! I’ll be doing a video on how gameplay at my table changed between BECMI and 5th edition, but you’ve touched on a lot of the points I’ll be raising. Thanks for commenting.
BECMI/RC D&D is my 2nd favorite version of D&D (only barely beaten by 4e) and it is phenomenal!
The Vancian System is actually in 5E, as the spells per level memorized appear on the level advancement charts on spellcaster characters. 4E introduced a bare-bones version of it with the number of total powers known for at will/encounter/daily/utility on a unified table for all class advancements. 5E actually brought the Vancian System back, with spells slots per level, but is the same system.
BECMI was probably my favorite edition, but that could be due to the mystery associated with my age at the time (8) and nostalgia. I actually started just after Christmas 1978 with the Holmes edition (2nd printing). We were lucky to have dice as just after we received out box, the new boxes started coming with the terrible chits. I am surprised I stuck with D&D considering how bad my initial experience was.
My buddy's dad was our DM and he was hard core. We had to remember to stop to eat, drink, and rest or we would get exhausted. We had to track every single item in our limited inventory. We rolled 3d6 down the line for our ability scores and my very first character only had one score higher than '8', which was a 9 in Dexterity. This mean I had to play a thief, and a bad one at that. I would have been able to reroll if I didn't qualify for any character, but since that 9 qualified me for thief, my DM required I keep it. With my dagger, I was almost useless in combat generally missing my attack and usually only inflicting 1 point of damage when I was lucky enough to hit the enemy. My thief skills were also poor and turned out to be his demise when we were captured by orcs. Our guard fell asleep and I tried to steal the key to our shackles. Of course, I failed, he woke up and killed me.
For most kids, that would have been the end of D&D. I mean who wants to play a game that was so unfun? But, somehow, my infatuation with the idea of playing my favorite fantasy heroes if I could roll better, kept me in and I've been a dedicated RPG'er ever since. I wish I could find a few people, my wife included, willing to play BECMI, but they did not start with the basic rules and therefore consider them "bad." I have to accept 5E as our default system, though I still use some pieces of basic D&D in my house rules, and certainly steal from the old skool adventure modules. I mean who doesn't LOVE keep on the borderlands. I love using Hommlet as my campaign's base of operations and the PCs venturing out from there into the caves of chaos or the silver princess's palace or perhaps the cynidicean pyramid.
I started with the Holmes edition. I had lost chits all over my bedroom. I was 12. I remember wincing at seeing the dice in the store, knowing I couldn't afford it for awhile, but one day got some money from my parents so I could get that flimsy and brittle set of dice. I'm sure you did too and had that black grease crayon so that you could fill in the engraved numbers and then wipe off the excess for readability of the numbers. I had damn good eyesight but a person could go blind trying to read those dice.
I really love BECMI as it originally started as a means to collate several booklets into a coherent, understandable ruleset - the OG Holmes Dungeons and Dragons publication - then developed into the Mentzer editions with the Rules Cyclopedia again collated into that volume as you've said. Great video - I personally use BFRPG (and OSRIC) - but was an 80s BECMI kid. Will always love this style of D&D.
I'm running a campaign with the Rules Cyclopedia for my kids. It's been going for 4 years now, and started when the oldest was 8 years old.
That sounds brilliant!
I was playing old school essentials with some friends and this really helped instill the old school ethos in me. As someone who only played modern games this introduction is clear and concise and greatly appreciated Berserker!
That’s great to know. Tell all your friends! 🙂 Seriously though, I hope you’re enjoying the old school feel.
I am a huge BECMI fan... Its the only D&D I play. Mystara is always my go-to world, but having played for decades I wander the multiverse with impunity.
I'm first here! Lol 🤣 Nice video, sir! Thnx 🤓👊 Please keep scratching at this surface, and well beyond, sir! Great stuff!! 👍
The Basic boxed set was the first D&D product I ever owned, and I still have a soft spot for BECMI because of that. Even though, I never got to actually play D&D until 97 with 2nd edition. There are a handful of things I'd change running it, but the majority of it is a very solid and workable system, and it is far more cohesive than AD&D.
This brings back some memories. I remember the Rules Cyclopedia but I first started D&D when it came in a black box in toy stores and came with hole-punched cards for a solo+initial adventure ("Zanzer's Dungeon" IIRC it was). I had played 1st and 2nd AD&D, 3.5, and 4e and I'm looking at trying to get back into D&D, but I can't quite decide which version.
Even at the tender age of 16 we worked out how to create demi human classes by drawing Human fighter vs dwarven fighter vs Hin fighter xp and working it out from there. We had dwarf clerics before Rockhome was even released. Also stopped giving out treasure xp after the very first campaign.
This brings back so many memories. Good ones mostly but ultimately I also understand why BECMI times are over for me. The system just wasn't refined enough for the long haul (at least for me). I've always preferred skill based systems, after a few month of playing BECMI I was wondering why there were no rules or even suggestions how to implement skills. Then I found MERP and never looked back (except stroking the red box every other year and looking at old character sheets from the early 1980s, which I of course still keep in a little folder).
Please keep doing this series.
I’ll try. 🙂 Doing a channel takes far more time than I realised.
I hope you find the time, this is interesting content, a reminder of a fun system before everyone was special..... so no one was.
This is when not everyone got a damn trophy!!! You had to earn your power. I so miss these days!
I started with Basic in the early 90s. Then I started playing AD&D. I love the Rules Cyclopedia. I picked up a print on demand fairly recently. It's not a perfect text, and I understand there are some minor rules variations from the BECMI format, but I have a renewed appreciation for it. I especially like rules that are more open to interpretation, and the idea that you dont need a specific class and subclass to carry out a character concept. I'm running a Dungeon Crawl Classics game as of late, which really is a love letter to Basic D&D.
Great video, a few caveats and clarifications:
As BECMI and the Cyclopedia are prohibitively expensive on the 3rd party market, and I personally don't want to see WotC get another dime, I must recommend the OSR retroclone Dark Dungeons in it's stead. It's a free PDF and at-cost hardbound (around $27, damn inflation) from Lulu which is essentially a revised Rules Cyclopedia (as there were a LOT of errors in that book) with all the options presented as well as a chapter on Immortality. The RC itself didn't include Immortals rules initially, it came out in a separate box set (Wrath of the Immortals) and IIRC was heavily changed from the original Immortals box set. Dark Dungeons is more BECMI than BECMI, IMHO. Icing on the cake is that the minor amount of fluff text there is takes the piss out of the Jack Chick tract.
On Ability Score bonuses: Actually only B/X and BECMI(/RC) had the same bonus schema (topping out at +3 to rolls). OD&D had an entirely different schema along with Holmes Basic (both topped out at +1 to rolls). The two iterations of AD&D had marginal differences in how they handled ability score bonuses (but both were much more granular than the earlier and basic editions).
On Saving Throws: The original saving throw is a completely lost element of the game. The Poison save for example SUBVERTS Constitution. It doesn't matter how tough you are, the only thing that matters is your class of hero and level of experience when it comes to surviving a poison attack. This wasn't by accident. This entire class of vulnerability was discarded with the old saves. Another thing I've seen mentioned but we never really played that way but now I'm very keen on (it was a cause of many arguments) was that the Saving Throws order was important. A wand of paralysis would cause a save vs wands as it's higher on the list than paralysis, while a rod of paralysis elicits a paralysis save as it's further up the list than Rods. Rods and staves and spells sat at the bottom of the list as sort of baseline originators of spells. It also makes Wands special (and weaker) than they otherwise would be.
Thanks for commenting. If there’s a cheaper way for people to enjoy BECMI then great.
The rules cyclopedia is available as print on demand on Dmsguild. For $25,-
@@sanderpio8234 Correct, but the money goes to WotC. Hence my comment.
Regarding the issue of ability scores order, the newer versions grouped the physical stats (strength, dexterity, constitution) together, separate from the mental stats (intelligence, wisdom, charisma).
I recently ran a one shot! Everyone had a great time, but it's hard to make schedules work on a consistent basis. I would love to run another BECMI session.
Thanks for doing this series. An old grognard, I've played all the D&D versions. They all have their strengths and weaknesses, and great ideas can be mined from them all. I tend to skew toward rules light systems these days, but the old boxed set basic game has so much to recommend it in terms of concept.
BECMI is as simple or as complex as you want. I think the sweet spot is basic/expert with a sprinkling of companion and master rules and monsters for spice.
BECMI was the game I played in the main during the 80s with a bunch of 1e “chrome” before finally moving onto 1e permanently. I still have all my original box sets. Fond memories.
I watched a video 🎉. The ability scores where regrouped to make more sense. STR DEX CON is considered body; INT WIS CHA is considered soul or mind.
Thanks for the video you have a wonderful day!
Started a campaign recently. Using Rahasia as starting adventure. Having a blast - good times!
Good luck with it!
Having begun playing D&D in 1975 with 1974 booklets, I still think of D&D as that game with addition of Greyhawk - perhaps best introduction to which is D&D 1977 by Eric Holmes.
If in 1981, with release of B/X &/or AD&D you were to tell me I was playing 'basic' D&D or not playing D&D at all, I would laugh. Please do not try to convince me 'psionic mystics & half-orc ninja' is real D&D.
I really enjoyed this look at BECMI. I started with AD&D 1E and stuck with AD&D 2E. I just never could wrap my head around a race being the class as well. That's why I never played OD&D. Keep up the good work.
I appreciate you and your videos!!! ❤🏆🙌
When you bear in mind that other races are basically multiclassed, then level capping them makes sense imo
"Basic" is the power level I tend to prefer my adventures at, while "Expert" tends to contain the actual interesting adventure scenarios themselves.
I've come to really like race as class it's a great idea for encouraging role-playing other races as actual mythical races and not humans with pointy ears. It also allows races to really stand out differently than the average human it's a really good way to do alot of settings as well. Great video regardless will look over tye system perhaps a few ideas I can stick into my homebrew
My favorite version!
Yup! Ability scores are in the order of association with prime reqs
Thank you for this introduction! I had no idea. I've collected the core three for adnd 1ed. May have to get these too.
Old school goodness.
Where you became a hero and didn't start out as a superhero.
When the question came from the DM
about what do you want to do?
The answer was very very rairly ever on your character sheet.
I sincerely appreciate your Channel and the Tremendous amount of Information provided, and Perspective, as there are plenty of things I'll be dredging up from BECMI and AD&D, to aid in my 3rd Edition Games
I have been playing becmi for some time now. I'm never going back! This introduction video is one of the best i have seen. Good job!
I moved back to 3.5, took a side step to Pathfinder 1e, and took a step forward to P2e, but I am always looking for new and wonderful systems.
Thank you for this video
You’re more than welcome.
Ironically I picked up some Castles and Crusades books because I've always been an AD&D 1E/ 2E holdout for my games. I was willing to give C&C a try but didn't end up liking it as much as I wanted to at the start. While reading in the back of the C&C PHB I ran across something I thought was fairly profound; there are 4 basic character classes. Fighter, rogue, divine magic user, and magic user. I was thinking this was something particularly clever, like they'd really put their finger on the pulse of character archetypes, but realized with the help of your videos that this is what BECMI had all along (with demihumans alongside of course).
The more I learn about BECMI the more I am enjoying it - and lamenting the things that did not make the cut when moving to AD&D 1E (the vibrant character class progression system being at the top of that list). Bespoke stat scaling modifiers, and more/ different character classes in books like Unearthed Arcana seemed to be a replacement for the BECMI system that had a very intuitive path for advancement and maturation (and encouraged deeper play).
As soon as I figure out multiclassing and separating race/ class I'll be happily bolting on the NWP/ proficiency system and running a BECMI/1E mashup.
Old rules do everything I need. Move-attack-repeat. Then go do something else like talking to an npc or making a real decision. Because I so so so don't care whether someone is allowed to invoke intransigence as part of their secondary left-handed alternative second breakfast bonus action of opportunity. They're just hitting an orc. Just roll. The roll gets easier as your level goes up. Done.
Just ordered tales of dying earth by Vance. Have the basic and expert sets so will have a look at them again. Thank you.
I always justify xp for treasure as representative of the traps, puzzle solving, and critical thinking you had to go through to get there, without forcing the DM to jump through hoops of a complex system to calculate xp for each thing, or forcing the DM to make a judgment call about how challenging each obstacle was - the players may have a different opinion!
I am a comparatively young adventurer (I predate the Rules Cyclopedia by a year or two I think), and started in 3.5. However, the old ways have always interested me, especially BECMI. I have been collecting the the PDFs for a while through the DM'S Guild, but only just recently got the Print on Demand version of the Rules Cyclopedia, and I suggest heavily to anyone coming to BECMI to go for the physical book!
If you haven't got your old books or are too young to have gotten them, go get a copy of the Rules Cyclopedia (yeah I know no immortal rules but they weren't much use to start off with) be it print on demand or pdf. You'll never have to get another book, within six months of playing around you won't need third party content either, you'll be making your own things up. Monsters, worlds, races, classes. Plus if you want to add classes to the demihumans the RC tells you how in the back of the book as well as how to take them up to 36th (which we did a few times). You can, if you read through the book and understand the behind the screen stuff, there is nothing you can't do or have in BECMI that you could have in ad&d. Or not, it's that easy and the greatness of the system, you use all or none of what you want without it breaking the game.
What I started with was the basic red box set and then every edition of D&D (except 4th) thereafter. I am going to start a new BECMI game and just picked up the Old School Essential books (Advanced, which is not AD&D but has some additional options that are derived from AD&D for the basic D&D game).
We are going to start straight out Basic red box set and open up the options as new character options, rewards and achievements as games progress with the materials from OSE.
The system is fast paced and deadly, but the intensity level is definitely higher than the feel of 5e. Which characters tend to be a lot stronger and survivability much easier. It's a good change of pace from the usual to go back and very nostalgic. Great for one (or few) shot sessions too, as characters are quick and easy to create.
Great to have good videos giving this excellent version of D&D some attention!
I think the answer to "I want more" from the Old School is that in the Old School it's super easy to make "more." I remember playing DnD with my father back in the day, he was playing the brown books when they first turned up and played every edition through 2e, and we'd make stuff up all the time. I played a Jedi once, and had a crash-landed Predator (as in AvP) with a bunch of busted equipment in another game. We made up spells and magic items and used Arduin to roll quirks and "special traits" for characters ("tastes bad to monsters!").
It's actually easier in the Old School to have a unique character, because when you say you want to play a "tiefling" and there are no rules for it, you actually have to talk to your DM and explain what you want from it. Without a strict category, the limits are was open as your imagination.
Love this! It touches on my previous comments about 5e being a house of cards. In old school you don’t have to worry about whether an ability is going to nerf some other rule somewhere, you can wing it knowing it will work. Anything too powerful will quickly be obvious and can be dealt with. Great comment. Thank you.
I was born after the millennium. From my outsider's perspective you really have to be a certain type of person (which may rhyme with bosser) to say that 2nd edition is not old school enough.
I'm probably sticking to OSR and Genesys but this journey back in time is very interesting. I see a lot I like and a few things that I would absolutely houserule or look for a fork that does things differently.
This is a great intro to BECMI and how it differs (and WHY those differences are). Keep up the good work!
Thank you. Comments like this make it worthwhile.
@@becmiberserker FWIW, I’m a recent sub but this is the video that made me turn on notifications. 😁
@@KrooTon I appreciate the feedback. Thanks.
I'll expect that we're going to have more then a few new converts..
Great vid for the New year!!!
I’m just about done setting up with the keep on the boarder land on roll20, cannot wait to run it along with other basic adventures…..
Shame they won't re-release these.
I miss those box sets have the cyclopedia mind you
I rarely open my boxed sets anymore. I love them, but trying to find stuff is a lot harder than using the RC. They’ll always have a special place in my heart though.
For context and scale: Warduke, "Evil Superhero," had a Strength of 16 and was a serious threat.
This video is well thought out and simple to follow, great job.
Thanks, Loki.
I still have the D&D rules cyclopedia I bought in 1993.
nice. I gifted it to my brother in law, and recently he gave it to his son. It is the best version
Alright I haven't even watched the video yet but love the name.
Honestly I'm more and more tempted to create an old school D&D'esq game that sheds the clunkyness of AD&D (thaco etc.) while keeping true to the spirit of the game.
I’m actually considering doing a video on THAC0 vs. Ascending AC in the future. Clearly I’m a sucker for punishment!
Basic Fantasy gives the option of single classes that removed level limits on demi human class levels
Nice video on how the old basic systems used to work.
❤️ this !!!!!
Solid! Tank!!
You actually can play as a demihuman with a human class. There are loose guidelines for it on page 293 of the Rules Cyclopedia. I've never tried them so I'm not sure if they work well.
From your demi-human class, you get to keep "racial abilities", which I assume means things like goul-immunity, superior hearing, stone-cunning, infravision, and the halfling's AC, initiative, and ranged weapon bonuses. You also keep your level-limit from your demi-human class, and it says "rank abilities are gained normally", which I interpret as attack bonuses increasing at the same rate, gaining extra attacks, and those saving throw bonuses. Everything else is as the regular class.
I think if I ever wanted to play a half-elf I'd ask my DM if I could use these rules. I'd be losing out on the elf's fighter/mage combo, but I guess I wouldn't really mind, especially since I'd reach level 2 much faster.
i use to own basic, expert and the rules cyclopedia. i miss those books and would play them again in a heart beat. as well advanced. i still love those books. truth is i also love 3rd as well which i is my last D&D i ever bought.
The Print on demand copy of the Rules Cyclopedia, from DriveThruRpg is great. I can vouch for the quality, having gotten mine a few months ago. Can't tell it's a re-print from the original, other than it's a thicker book and has a tan/white border around the cover. Recommend, if you are looking to replace your old copy 🤘
Just today I did a drive through with some friends of the BF rules etc. The comments were all positive. Things like it is easier, when building a character it seems to come to life on its own, and I know everything I am carrying now. 🤣
Started out with 1e AD&D also played BECMI on occasion, but branched out to Call of Cthulhu and Shadowrun fairly quickly and never looked back.
I’m trying out Call of Cthulhu 7th myself. Seems great.
Death to Power play.....interesting system, I had a Basic and Advanced D&D introduction back in the early Eighties at school.
For me, old school is 1st edition advanced D&D with a lot of home brew rules
7:00 - I can actually explain this one. The reason the old ability scores were listed differently from modern day is that this is the order in which they were invented. Strength to differentiate a barely functional Fighting Man from an outstanding one, Intelligence for Magic Users, Wisdom for Clerics. Elves needed both Strength and Intelligence as they were Fighting Men and Magic Users at the same time. In the earliest days, nobody but a Fighter is hindered by sub average Strength because only the Fighter reaps benefits of high Strength in the first place, nobody but a mage needs Intelligence, and nobody but clerics need Wisdom.
Dexterity to help with missile weapons and armor class (later, the Thief glommed onto this stat that's actually for everybody). Constitution to help with durability in the forms of Hit Points and Saving Throws. Charisma to interact with NPC morale and manage your army of helpers, which you absolutely need in this edition especially if you're a Fighting Man.
In later editions, these were re-organized to put the physical aptitudes in one orderly segment and the mental ones in another, and the rules for each ability score were expanded to help everyone even if a wizard is considerably _less_ helped by strength and a warrior _less_ by intelligence.
i first played the basic box set, and have played all th versions apart from 4e, all our group loved AD&D 2e Skills and Powers books, however we stuck with Pathfinder 1e, but might try Pathfinder 2e, but as compatability, as a DM I still use a lot of my D&D and AD&D rules, and adventures.
Great to learn that you can still incorporate old school products into your game. Thanks for commenting.
I recently discovered Hyperborea 3rd edition and it’s a great system/world/game. My only complaint is that it sucks getting the books if you’re outside the states (Canadian here).
One note: the rules were in different scope - but also there were NEW elements of rules you were now ready for. The Red “Basic” or Blue “Expert” in BECMI was not all the rules that apply to those levels - there were rules you got later where you apply them to those early tiers. To get all the rules that apply to level 1-3, you needed more, the “Basic and Expert” sets were like the “SRD” - and little of Mystara and the expansive rules you would be ready for as you learn more. You were not playing one character and were encouraged to start and play new characters. There are some major issues with saying the Rules Cyclopedia is a game inpprovement. It was deal reference to make it easy to find things- but they screwed up the thief.
Can you elaborate on how they screwed up the thief?
I have all the BECMI boxes but we never really played pasted Expert (with some stuff borrowed from others sets and AD&D) .
Oh man, the memories. Still love the old system (but still dislike THACO). I totally forgot about xp percentage bonus. Without a doubt, I never had more deaths in my campaigns then in BECMI for my players.
I do hope after the boxes sets that you delve into the excellent Gazetteer books. They are what kept me playing BECMI into the 90s before I moved to 3rd Ed.
You can count on it!
Red and blue for me is true
It sounds like, to run this properly coming from lots of 5E experience as a DM, the group would call for rolls only when it was agreed necessary. Example being, your character is known for being good at 'x', so most of the time we just assume they succeed at 'x', but when you want to attempt something using 'x' that seems more difficult than usual you would roll for it. Yell at me if I'm not quite getting it. It just seems like with a system like this if you rolled for as much stuff as we do in 5E, the game would descend into chaos very quickly unless the players really had their shit together and were avoiding rolls like the plague.
For added context, I ran a fairly mean 5E game that tended to kill characters that went off on their own too often. Usually, if the party stayed together, they could be okay in most situations (though there were still plenty of close calls). I just had these players that have their characters linger behind or wander off alone, get a little unlucky and die...that's all it takes sometimes. That said, heroic deaths did also occur. There's a statue in a town dedicated to a former character of one of my campaigns for that very reason. Let's just say, their feats of heroism were very poignantly and gruesomely witnessed by the party and the refugees they saved with their actions. The system itself never felt like it was holding me back from running a challenging game, though, the death saves and healing abundance were definitely a contentious issue for me. I tried getting a group to play with the adjusted rules suggestions for long rests and such, but they felt it would be too punishing. To me, the change of a mechanic like that is just an adjustment of expectations overall. I will always find the fun. I think it's just harder for most people to be receptive to alternative play when they have already acquired a set of expectations over time from their consumption of streamed games and their own previous experiences (and often don't want to at all, people really resist change). It's baggage. It's media saturation baggage, really. I think I'd love to run something like BECMI, but I have literally no idea how to pitch it in a way that makes it sound appealing to anyone I know. I suspect I'd have to find people or a group that already knows they like it.
Thanks for commenting. I know it may seem like it might descend into chaos if you come from a more…erm…structured system like 5e, but it really isn’t like that. For instance, if you wanted to do something, you’d raise it with the DM, who would weigh up whether it would be possible given the circumstances. What becomes interesting is that the other players can police the circumstances as well, such as agreeing or disagreeing whether something might be possible, which is usually good natured. The DM has final say of course. It’s not as convoluted as it sounds, I promise, and can make from some really interesting “solutions” for the players to come up with, given their thinking is not constrained to a list of skills. I hope you give it a try one day.
@@becmiberserker Oh no, you misunderstood what I was implying, I think. I was speculating that it could descend into chaos IF you tried to play it like 5E with as many rolls taking place as typically does in that system. So, I imagined doing pretty much exactly what you described, instead, because that's the only natural alternative I can see.
@@keithwinget6521 Sorry I misunderstood, and glad you picked it up. Thanks. 🙂
I wanna play BECMI again 😁
Just say when! Nice to see you here, dude.
becmi was great for starting into this hobby. while I like Ad&d I prefer 2nd edition with carry overs rules from 1st. i stopped buying after third edition was released. and to this day refuse to play anything beyond second edition. sadly i have few friends who wish to play anymore. and that is ok. i have other systems i enjoy.
Thanks for sharing!
Also a note, the Rules Cyclopedia has rules for running races and classes seperately in the back of the book.
And expanding demihuman levels to 36
@@MrSteveK1138 yeah but don't use those tables, they're really dog shit.
Just make Demis get +2 HP after level cap and problem solved.
11:34 saving throws are different systems but I don’t think one is better than the other. In older editions saving throws are linked to your class while 5e it’s based on your ability score. How is this different practically (or thematically)?
In 5e when you make a DEX save it ALWAYS assumes you are dodging the dragon’s breath weapon, while in BECMI a wizard would raise a magical shield, a warrior would use his metal shield etc. More room for narrative.
Also, saves, like everything else in OSR games (including BECMI here) it’s all linked to level as the most important progression path.
Fighter, Magic User, Cleric and Thief
I've actually heard 3rd edition referred to as old school. By people who are old enough that you'd think they would know better.
I was actually going to ask if you would do a series on BECMI. This is great!
I am planning to run Castles & Crusades for some friends, as it's closer to what BECMI was, but has a touch of 3e and up to satisfy the players enough to try it, but I am also going to run a family game of BECMI. By far, my favorite.
Do you happen to know if the PDF's of the red and blue BECMI books on DriveThruRpg are any good? I got the pod of Rules Cyclopedia a few months ago, and it's really good. But, I'd like to get the basic and expert books, as I only have the Norwegian translations. Was lucky enough to get the companion and master boxes in English.
Anyway, keep up the good work, and I look forward to more BECMI videos 🤘
Ps: the lack of ambient music was no issue, for me at least. Sometimes, it can muddle speech or distract. Hasn't been an issue so far though 🤘
Happy New Year to you and everyone involved in the comment section.
May 2023 be a prosperous and wonderful year for you all!
Thanks for the kind words. I can’t speak for the quality of the boxed set PDFs. There may be reviews on the site. Thanks for watching and please share with your BECMI mates. To be course and vulgar, I need all the subscriptions I can get. 🙂
@@becmiberserker Oh, I already have 🤘
Btw, have you checked out The Dungeon Minister? He's running BECMI for his family and goes over their sessions. Fun watch and I highly recommend it.
@@MarkGoldfine Thanks for this. Will check it out.
I love BECMI, especially the game world and adventures created for it. But there are a few game mechanics and limitations I never want to go back to: THAC0, descending AC, race-as-class, weak magic-users at low level, and the comparatively thin spell lists.
I can appreciate that. It’s nice diving back into it, but I can see how decades of change might have newer players confused.
The only thing “basic” about BECMI was the unfortunate name from the first boxed set. It was wise enough to teach you how to play first, then expanded on the rules as you needed them. A far more agreeable process than to bury you in every rule you could possibly need (which is half of why Gygax made the 1st edition, due to rules scamming tournament players)
Then not even bother to teach you how to play.
BECMI continued expanding with far more than most players would ever need whereas subsequent editions,continuing to this day, didn’t even bother. Then BECMI went on to put almost its entirety in one 300 page book. The common assumption of thinking it was a lesser game is grossly inaccurate. It wasn’t “Basic D&D”, it was just D&D. Same as it had been for the previous decade. I often think of what D&D might have become if the Dave vs Gary rift had never happened.
Alas we may have actually had…
BECMI Forever!
Long Live King Elmore!!
The only thing I take issue with in this video is that you seem to think 'Character Growth' and 'Character Build' are seperate, when in fact the build is just a greater expression of how your character progresses as a person, storytelling comes from the mechanics and mechanics come from the storytelling, tabletop should be less like a clash between the game and the story and more like a harmony of it. I will say as a 3.5 purist you've painted BECMI as something of incredible value, I can at least see why you'd want to play this edition over another. The same can't be said for 5e...
QUESTION:
I own the hard copy of Basic Rules by Tom Moldvay and Expert Rules by David Cook & Steve Marsh. Are these compatible with BECMI Frank Mentzer rules??? I'm not over excited about purchasing the D&D Rules Cyclopedia. BUT purchasing those Basic & Expert rules by him wouldn't be terrible if required for continuity.
Entirely compatible. There is little discernible difference at all unless you go looking for them. The biggest is the change in Thief skill scaling, as BECMI made it to publishing up to 36th level. Otherwise, you’ll have no issue.
Thank you. I find your vidieos on the BEDMI VERY educational and would like many more. I know you said you feel they are long, and younger viewer most like follow that perspective. I do not. I want to learn much more about these. I came from D&D white box set back around 1977. Then bought the AD&D rule books because of Elsie on the ad for the Monster Manual in 1979? A very dumb choice, as I felt the books were a better buy vs a "small" box set of which I owned, as I said, the previous White Box of three little books. Unware at the time that once you bought the DMG, you then needed the Players Book. Then the Monster Manual. And so on down the rabbit hole I went. If I would have gone with the Basic Box set, then I would have learned about the Expert rules, and so on. Ultimently, being a better DM back in this long lost age! LOL. No. I wasn't terrible. But I did not feel I grasped Gary Gygax's AD&D rules, any more than those three little books I had. And, I even talked to him because of those issues (which he learned up some, others he himself did not seem to know how to convey understanding). Today, I hope to find players wanting to go this route, as I believe as you do. The new rules (3rd edition and up) have become a money maker, and too damn complicated. A coworker gave me some of those 5th edition rules in hopes I'd run them BUT I felt I was returning to college!!!
Again, thanks for your response. @@becmiberserker
@@kellyjeaularson5786You are more than welcome. My first ever video speaks about a similar journey. I can’t look at 5th edition now without thinking it’s a card game disguised as an RPG - I mention this in my reasons for leaving 5e video. Anyway, glad to steer you away from all that back to a simpler way. 👍
Becmi is best.
Came for Mystara, stayed for Dark Dungeons.
Is it fair to say the full breadth of the BECMI system could answer the question “B/X is fine and all, but I do eventually want to play a god or powerful character?”
Is it the original answer to high level play, using the simplicity of the B/X framework?
I love B/X and don’t find super heroes interesting, but often get asked “if not 5e (supers) then what?”
I think it is! I mean, the systems are close enough to almost be the same. If you play B/X and want to push beyond Expert then BECMI might be what you’re looking for.
Being someone who started with 3.5e, the thac0 system is alien to me 😅 For example, the old Icewind Dale pc game was confusing, but Neverwinter Nights clicked immediately.
I find it really strange when people say the THAC0 system was odd. 🙂 I found it really simple, but I guess it was how I learned the game. In essence, if you need an 18 To Hit AC0, then it follows that you’ll need an 11 to hit AC7, or a 19 to hit AC-1. You probably know this, so apologies if I geeked out a little. 🙂