D&D (2024) In Interview with GamesRadar, Chris Perkins Discusses New Books

[Maxperson]

Well, we cared that "Basic" was presented as a kid's game, so being 12 we preferred the "grown up" AD&D. Even when running adventures designed for Basic.

I ran basic modules for AD&D games and while I could do it easily, they were off a bit. The numbers didn't add up. The monster variety was hyper limited. It often didn't give you all the information about something, because basic was more limited than AD&D. There were some issues, but you could do it. I eventually just avoided those modules and ran AD&D modules and my created adventures only.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I ran basic modules for AD&D games and while I could do it easily, they were off a bit. The numbers didn't add up. The monster variety was hyper limited. It often didn't give you all the information about something, because basic was more limited than AD&D. There were some issues, but you could do it. I eventually just avoided those modules and ran AD&D modules and my created adventures only.

That's probably why I always considered Keep on the Borderlands/Caves of Chaos a rubbish adventure.

But Castle Amber is awesome in any edition.

 

[dave2008]

What about the bolded parts? It points out the 5 editions. Are you talking about the half editions as editions? Those weren't. They were a part of the edition that put them out. Are you talking about the other games of D&D like basic? Those are not part of the numbered editions of the game, all of which are AD&D.

If you can't read what you wrote and see the issues, i don't have the energy or time to help

 

[dave2008]

Of course it didn't use the terminology. It wasn't an edition of the game. It was a separate game called D&D. Like my example above with chess and 4 way chess. Both are chess(D&D), but they are different games of chess(D&D). It can be argued that basic had different editions of that game, though.

That is a bad analogy. Again, if you can't see that - I don't have the time or energy to help. I shouldn't have stepped in to begin with. After my daughter's death these arguments just seem too ridiculous. My mistake for wading in, sorry.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

To zoom in on this: BD&D & AD&D were not different like normal chess and 4 way chess. It's more like a chess set with wooden pieces versus one with plastic pieces.

Ze game is ze same.

Nah. There is a difference. I was quite confused when I played stronghold and elves, halflings and dwarves were classes.

 

[Cadence]

Nah. There is a difference. I was quite confused when I played stronghold and elves, halflings and dwarves were classes.

We played B/X, OD&D, and AD&D at the same table at the same time with each player using what they had. Is it less different doing that than it would be toggling a bunch of optional rules on and off in 5e?

In any case, we also once played Monopoly, Careers, and Life (iirc, maybe Payday?) by overlapping the corners of the boards, so could have just been us.

 

[Oofta]

We played B/X, OD&D, and AD&D at the same.tablr.at the same time with each player using what they had. Is it less different doing that than it would be toggling a bunch of optional rules on and off in 5e?

In any case, we also once played Monopoly, Careers, and Life (iirc, maybe Payday?) by overlapping the corners of.the boards, so could have just been us.

While I admit to playing nuclear Risk, playing Monopoly, Careers and Life simultaneously does put you into a very ... special ... category.

As far as the recent thread trend, versions are just an indicator that the game rules are pretty compatible for most people, an indicator that has slowly emerged over time. Getting caught up on exact details doesn't really matter. Version numbers aren't arbitrary, doesn't mean they aren't also part of marketing the game and an attempt to indicate how easy it is to mix and match. Unless you're Cadence, master of mish-mash.

 

[Cadence]

While I admit to playing nuclear Risk, playing Monopoly, Careers and Life simultaneously does put you into a very ... special ... category.

As far as the recent thread trend, versions are just an indicator that the game rules are pretty compatible for most people, an indicator that has slowly emerged over time. Getting caught up on exact details doesn't really matter. Version numbers aren't arbitrary, doesn't mean they aren't also part of marketing the game and an attempt to indicate how easy it is to mix and match. Unless you're Cadence, master of mish-mash.

My son is into multiversal fan fiction... talk about mish-mash!

 

[Maxperson]

We played B/X, OD&D, and AD&D at the same table at the same time with each player using what they had. Is it less different doing that than it would be toggling a bunch of optional rules on and off in 5e?

In any case, we also once played Monopoly, Careers, and Life (iirc, maybe Payday?) by overlapping the corners of the boards, so could have just been us.

Kids and young people in my experience have a higher tolerance for mixing things up and having a good time doing it. I have some friends that I played games with when we were in junior high and we did things like that, too. Now I have a hard time getting them to change up a single rule in a board game.

Editions are sequential, not concurrent. Original D&D morphed through edition changes into basic and then to BECMI. AD&D began as a different game of D&D at 1st edition and then morphed over time into 5e. They were two concurrent games of D&D until BECMI was discontinued.

When it comes to the two games, ability scores worked differently, alignment worked differently, character classes were different(three race classes), saving throws were different, turn undead worked differently, clerics got no spells at 1st level in basic, in basic every PC used the same combat to hit chart, and AD&D had far, FAR more rules than basic and the ones that were common to both were often different.

 

[Parmandur]

That I know about, I've never met someone(other than you here online) for whom it was a useless term. As I said, I disagree with your opinion about the usefulness of the term as it relates to games.

And yet WotC is dropping the terminology permanently, and no doubt will get away with it just fine.

To play basic and advanced together, you had to alter the rules. Elves, dwarves and halflings were only a race in AD&D, but were classes in basic. Those don't mesh together. And those are just some of the differences that had to be reconciled. They were not the same game.

And yet people at the time did, and going back and reading the material myself as someone who started with 3.x...it doesn't seem that hard. At worst, maybe using Shoji pieces to play western chess.

Basic was an edition of basic D&D, yes. It was not an edition of AD&D, which begins with 1e. And no, there have not been 9 editions of AD&D. Objectively, using the RPG definition which is the only one that matters, there have been only 5 editions of AD&D. And half edition revisions for most of them.

TSR and WotC marketing BS is not objective, it is language manipulation to try and maximize sales. And half editions are not a thing. ISBNs indicating a new edition with the Federal government? That's a thing, and there have been 9 sets of ISBNs, and there are no "half-ISBNs".

Nah. There is a difference. I was quite confused when I played stronghold and elves, halflings and dwarves were classes.

And yet people did mix it, and by most accounts easily.

Editions are sequential, not concurrent.

Ideally, sure, but...Cocaine is one helluva drug, as is spite.

Original D&D morphed through edition changes into basic and then to BECMI. AD&D began as a different game of D&D at 1st edition and then morphed over time into 5e. They were two concurrent games of D&D until BECMI was discontinued.

When it comes to the two games, ability scores worked differently, alignment worked differently, character classes were different(three race classes), saving throws were different, turn undead worked differently, clerics got no spells at 1st level in basic, in basic every PC used the same combat to hit chart, and AD&D had far, FAR more rules than basic and the ones that were common to both were often different.

And yet people managed to mix them without serious issues?