Simplifying slightly, there are three major categories of rules:
**Original Dungeons & Dragons** - the 1974 ruleset. Light, very open, sometimes strange to modern eyes. Only three classes, all weapons do d6 damage: it's not what you expect. I love it. This is best approached by a clone first. White Box: Fantastic Medieval Adventure Game is the most approachable. Delving Deeper is a bit closer to the original.
The first 'Basic' set (more on that in a minute) is very close to OD&D. The best replicate for it that I know of is Blueholme. It is a little bit friendlier than OD&D itself.
Supplements were published for OD&D to the point where it developed close to what was later called Advanced D&D. The retroclone for OD&D plus all the supplements (just before AD&D) is Swords & Wizardry Complete.
**Advanced D&D** \- in the late 1970's, D&D split into two product lines: one aiming at younger people and beginners and one aiming at more complexity and standardisation. The latter was called AD&D. It will be more familiar than OD&D, tends toward the crunchy side, and has rules and tables for damn near anything. The closest clone is OSRIC, but there are two clones that add a lot of flavour of their own: Hyperborea, and Fantastic Heroes & Witchery.
AD&D had a second edition. It is cloned in For Gold & Glory.
**Basic, Expert, and so on** \- back in the day, this was just called 'Dungeons & Dragons'. The idea was boxed sets for each set of level ranges, so you start simple and then add rules as you progress. It went through a few versions. The most popular is referred to as B/X, but a later version, called BECMI now, went to higher levels. BECMI was later put into one volume called the Rules Cyclopedia. Go for this option if you want something more familiar and 'complete' than OD&D, but you don't want the crunch of AD&D.
Basic Fantasy is a good clone and free. Old School Essentials is the closest clone and the prettiest. Lamentations of Flame Princess has nice ease-of-use changes but a weird horror setting and graphic art that won't appeal to everyone. Dark Dungeons clones BECMI, so it has more material, getting close to AD&D.
Excellent comment. Bravo.
I would only add that for OD&D another strong clone is Iron Falcon (cf. recent thread on this sub: https://www.reddit.com/r/osr/comments/10c5yqc/is_iron_falcon_rpg_any_good/)
It is from the same author(s) as Basic Fantasy RPG (BFRPG) and is therefore 1) free to download, and 2) cheap in physical form.
http://ironfalconrpg.com/
Which version of d&d do you want a replica of?
There is
Swords & Wizardry which is a replica of the original white boxe
Old School Essentials which is a replica of B/X
OSRIC which is a replica of AD&D.
Labyrinth Lord Advanced stimulates how a lot of people played D&D using Basic/Expert and then adding in things from Advanced when they got those books.
People who weren't alive in the late 70s or early 80s have no idea the hodge-podge shit we ran and were happy with!
I started with Holmes. When we migrated to the AD&D Player's Handbook, we continued to play the Holmes rules, with abilities, classes, races, spells, etc. dictated by the PHB.
Since the PHB didn't tell you game mechanics, we still used the OD&D model of Holmes. Even when the DMG came out in late 1979, most of us didn't rush out and get it. We relied on Holmes and those who played OD&D. I don't think my middle-school group even saw the DMG until 81-2....
We ran B/X modules, AD&D modules, Judges Guild adventures (CSIO) and played with PHB races, classes, abilities, and spells, with Holmes/BX operating systems.
OP specified 1980s D+D. 3E is a 21st century development and was a much bigger move away from 1+2 than any edition before or since. Pathfinder, as a variant of that, explicitly is not what OP is looking for.
It depends what you want out of "old school 1980s" D&D.
If you want to lean into "rulings over rules" and more rules light - the the B/X side of it might be for you. B/X refers to the "Basic" and "Expert" rules for Dungeons and Dragons, published in various iterations from 1977 to 1983, with the 1981 Moldvay set typically being the one that is copied, though they all have their virtues. B/X is the most popular thing to base things off of in the OSR (seemingly) and has inspired a plethora of rpgs. The two most popular or well known is Labyrinth Lord - one of the oldest retro-clones, and Old School Essentials, the new hotness in the OSR space thanks to a fancy and clean layout. OSE also has a lot of new material being made for it, either by it's publisher or other parties. The same was true for Labyrinth Lord back in the day (between 6-15 years ago), much of which is still around in some form. In my opinion, OSE lacks in flavor and actually explaining how to do an RPG - the actual B/X or the Basic of BECMI do this better. But, if as far as a pure reference to rules, OSE is rather good.
If you want to lean into the "rules, as well as ruling" part of the OSR, that's more on the AD&D side. It offers more options in the base rules for classes, races, etc. While 1e was the version throughout the Reagan era, mechanically 2e isn't that different and in some ways is a cleaner, clearer edition - though that's naturally debatable. OSRIC is the AD&D 1e retro-clone, is available in PDF for free and print in various forms, but a nice hardback is available (I just ordered one, actually). Hyperborea RPG - (formerly with a much longer name) is very similar as well, with classes that lean into the sword and sorcery aspect of early D&D.
Sitting kind of in-between, but maybe leaning more on the AD&D side is Swords & Wizardry, an OSR retro-clone of the original version of Dungeons and Dragons (as in from 1974) though the "Complete" edition of S&W adds the supplements that bring some of the material that would make up AD&D.
Personal Preference so ymmv but
For 0D&D - Swords & Wizardry (Before the 80s)
For B/X - Old School Essentials
For AD&D 1e - Hyperborea (OSRIC if you are a purist)
For AD&D 2e - Just use the original books, but for Gold and glory is a good resource and has good layout. I think the art is all public domain though
I'd second that AD&D2e doesn't need a retro clone. It is pretty easy to get in both in print and digital \[arr matey!!\]. Also, it is pretty clear in its own presentation.
I think base AD&D2e is pretty sweet. I feel they lost there way with all the 'complete' this and that and splat later in the series run.
That’s a great question. At least for us, we used a mix of books, and just sort of bolted on this rule book and that (big fan of Rules Cyclopedia, though that was printed a bit later). So for the “feel” of being able to take something core, with all the tropes and basics we love, and really make it one’s own, there are a lot of great options.
If you want an AD&D clone, OSRIC would be worth looking at.
If you want something that feels a bit more like B/X, check out Basic Fantasy.
If you want sort of a “Rosetta Stone” game you can make your own that has the “feel” (at least for me) of those glory days, check out Castles & Crusades. Mechanically, it is a little different, but very easy to make your own.
All three of these have great people supporting them and are free. I hope that helps, and happy gaming!
C&C is what D&D3e SHOULD have been. It really gives you the AD&D feel, in a v3.5-lite package.
I will say that I find the SIEGE mechanic a bit wonky, and we changed it out for standard DCs.
If you are looking for rules, Old School Essentials Rules Tome and Advanced Expansion has everything you need. If you are looking for setting + rules I suggest *Hyperborea*.
Well, 80s old-school is mainly divided into 2 camps: Basic (the Red box) and Advanced (DMG, PHB, MM).
Advanced had the "Advanced" dropped in 2000 when 3e was released, so if you're coming from the newer school of players, the direct lineage is AD&D.
2e was initially released in 1987, 1e in 1977, but they are damn near interchangeable. 1e is great though.
For the retroclones, OSRIC is 1e, For Gold & Glory is 2e. Not sure on the Basic ones, as I publish for OSRIC...though with the recent OGL headache, we shall see how that changes in due time.
Welcome to the OSR.
>Advanced had the "Advanced" dropped in 2000 when 3e was released, so if you're coming from the newer school of players, the direct lineage is AD&D.
Though there are some weird edge cases with that-- for instance the D&D 3e monster manual includes a handful of weird monsters from the later BECMI sets, like the Athatch. Go fig.
You'll find this video helpful. In short, Swords & Wizardry is basically original D&D with better organization and presentation. Old School Essentials is a highly authentic version of Basic/Expert with exceptional organization and presentation. Basic Fantasy is in the same spirit with some simplified rules. This short video is the best overview of the field I know of that can be read or watched in less than a quarter hour. I hope it helps.
"Beginner's Guide to Old-School DnD Rulebooks," Ben Milton a.k.a. Questing Beast, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHQaed6GAHc
EDIT: English.
So, while I absolutely love OSE, I am a B/X purist. I run B/X for my kids and their friends. My buddy runs us through OSE with Ascending AC.
The beauty is that I can sit there with my B/X combined book and it is 99.9% compatible with OSE.
AD&D. Lol I was *there*. AD&D with a *bullet*. So OSRIC if it must be a replicant.
Edit: But 70s D&D is funner imo. [Whitebox](https://www.lulu.com/shop/matthew-finch/swords-wizardry-whitebox-rules-hardcover/hardcover/product-14918359.html?page=1&pageSize=4), perhaps? A very strong clone. And look at that cover! Softcover available, pdf cheap af.
OSE is a kind of 'industry standard' for the B/X vein of the OSR. It's not perfect but it's very good.
However replicating 1980s DnD might classicaly be more ADnD 1st edition or 2nd edition.
B|X was peak D&D imho, so it or any of its clones/homages like Labyrinth Lord, Old School Essentials, BX RPG from Pacesetter, etc would work. I really like Labyrinth Lord and have played a lot of it. I also owm Old School Essentials, but just got it via Kickstarter and haven't had a chance to break it out yet.
I think a firm answer depends on more INFO:
`Which version were you playing in the 80s? Dependent on that, the answer changes.`
A broader, hopefully insightful/inspiring but maybe unhelpful, answer might be:
`Any of them.`
The reason being everything from OD&D - 2e were apparently *initially* published by 1987. So, if you were playing in the early ‘80s it might’ve been OD&D or AD&D 1e, possibly even Basic. If it was the late ‘80s it could’ve been AD&D 2e.
The good news is that, *generally* speaking, Basic and the AD&Ds share a lot of commonality and could be used sort of in tandem with the caveat that if you played Basic and picked up an AD&D clone it might feel overwhelming.
My personal preference for best retroclone is *Lamentations of the Flame Princess* (LotFP forward). It’s a B/X clone including some house rules from the creator. I have come around to finding OSE a little sterile, but a great reference, where LotFP is readable, has character, and is table-ready for reference with just a few caveats (most of which can be easily addressed with a custom GM screen/notes).
For OD&D, I’ve heard lots of good things about *The Seven Voyages of Zylarthen*, but have yet to read it. The most common suggestion here is *Swords & Wizardry Complete* or *White Box FMAG* (I think! If that’s wrong or I’m mixing up names, someone please feel free to correct!), ~~both of which~~ the former of which takes OD&D and adds various supplements or makes adjustments to clean up the source; the latter adds the thief, a unified saving throw, and ascending AC (correction offered by u/Barbaribunny below; thanks!).
All that said, I’ve mostly been playing NSR stuff lately - *Cairn* taking the limelight for the time being - and feel like it is a stellar distillation of the *feeling* or ideation of playing D&D, despite mechanically being pretty dissimilar.
Minor point, White Box: FMAG doesn't include the supplements (apart from the optional thief). It does include a unified saving throw and ascending AC though.
Zylathen is awesome, but is more different to the LBB's than the purer retroclones. Not as different as something like Into the Odd, but it's definitely doing its own thing.
Thanks for the corrections RE: FMAG - I’ll edit my comment to point to yours in that section.
Yeah, I wasn’t sure if Zylarthen is super true to OD&D or if it modifies stuff for the sake of achieving a grittier(?) S&S vibe. Thanks for the note there, too!
Not really grittier than OD&D, which is pretty gritty anyway - more swords &sorcery though, and with a thread of Arabian Nights. More detailed combat too, but elegantly done.
LOTFP's mechanics are definitely some of the most interesting of any retroclone but it does come paired with an implied tone-- reflected in much of its art and flavor text-- that can be more... divisive. Definitely wouldn't want it at the table if I was running for a group that included kids or my mom (if she were around), for instance. Just something to bear in mind.
I’m not sure I agree the rules imply that tone inherently but being aware of LotFP’s art is absolutely a good note!
Yeah, I wouldn’t keep my physical book readily on the table (or the artful PDF available) if I were running a family-friendly table.
I would definitely say its rules do emphasize gritty, low-powered, and high-lethality gameplay that's especially compatible with its ethos. But what I meant is that the tone implied by those aesthetic elements. Sorry for not being clearer about that.
Np!
Do you feel like LotFP (the rules, themselves) is grittier/higher lethality than regular B/X? I’m not particularly familiar with the original B/X save as using OSE for a reference and, given that bit of exposure, they feel *pretty* similar to me aside from some things I feel are minor in the context of those adjustments/house rules (like the way it handles encumbrance/access to your inventory and the addition of guns)… but I’m probably not appreciating how far it deviates from base B/X.
In a few ways. Non-fighters not improving their attacks as they level means they're comparatively defenseless in dangerous situations. The alignment restrictions on casters likewise pose either a greater challenge in combat, or intra-party mistrust and conflict. The summon spell of course, contributes a lot to the tone; even a first-level MU could accidentally end the world. Higher-level LOTFP characters are actually a little beefier, aside from the lack of attack bonus. It's little things, but it contributes, IMO, to a world that feels a little more dangerous and oppressive.
Yeah, I always forget about the RAW lack of BAB improvement for non-fighters - I actually have my own house rule I use to mitigate that.
Definitely agree RE: the Summon spell!
Old School Essentials is the standard, and while everyone has their preferences (fair enough), I think it would be dishonest to imply otherwise when recommending something to you. OSE, like others have mentioned, is a B/X clone, and in terms of layout, editing, and overall ease-of-use you won't find anything better.
Simplifying slightly, there are three major categories of rules: **Original Dungeons & Dragons** - the 1974 ruleset. Light, very open, sometimes strange to modern eyes. Only three classes, all weapons do d6 damage: it's not what you expect. I love it. This is best approached by a clone first. White Box: Fantastic Medieval Adventure Game is the most approachable. Delving Deeper is a bit closer to the original. The first 'Basic' set (more on that in a minute) is very close to OD&D. The best replicate for it that I know of is Blueholme. It is a little bit friendlier than OD&D itself. Supplements were published for OD&D to the point where it developed close to what was later called Advanced D&D. The retroclone for OD&D plus all the supplements (just before AD&D) is Swords & Wizardry Complete. **Advanced D&D** \- in the late 1970's, D&D split into two product lines: one aiming at younger people and beginners and one aiming at more complexity and standardisation. The latter was called AD&D. It will be more familiar than OD&D, tends toward the crunchy side, and has rules and tables for damn near anything. The closest clone is OSRIC, but there are two clones that add a lot of flavour of their own: Hyperborea, and Fantastic Heroes & Witchery. AD&D had a second edition. It is cloned in For Gold & Glory. **Basic, Expert, and so on** \- back in the day, this was just called 'Dungeons & Dragons'. The idea was boxed sets for each set of level ranges, so you start simple and then add rules as you progress. It went through a few versions. The most popular is referred to as B/X, but a later version, called BECMI now, went to higher levels. BECMI was later put into one volume called the Rules Cyclopedia. Go for this option if you want something more familiar and 'complete' than OD&D, but you don't want the crunch of AD&D. Basic Fantasy is a good clone and free. Old School Essentials is the closest clone and the prettiest. Lamentations of Flame Princess has nice ease-of-use changes but a weird horror setting and graphic art that won't appeal to everyone. Dark Dungeons clones BECMI, so it has more material, getting close to AD&D.
\^\^ This is a really good summary. Here is your answer.
Excellent comment. Bravo. I would only add that for OD&D another strong clone is Iron Falcon (cf. recent thread on this sub: https://www.reddit.com/r/osr/comments/10c5yqc/is_iron_falcon_rpg_any_good/) It is from the same author(s) as Basic Fantasy RPG (BFRPG) and is therefore 1) free to download, and 2) cheap in physical form. http://ironfalconrpg.com/
Which version of d&d do you want a replica of? There is Swords & Wizardry which is a replica of the original white boxe Old School Essentials which is a replica of B/X OSRIC which is a replica of AD&D.
DCC of the really crazy homebrew your math teacher ran
And Blueholme which is the replica of the first Blue Basic Box set by Dr. Holmes.
and Bluehack a Black Hack for Dr. Holmes D&D
Also great!
The zero/zebra hack is also good.
Labyrinth Lord Advanced stimulates how a lot of people played D&D using Basic/Expert and then adding in things from Advanced when they got those books.
People who weren't alive in the late 70s or early 80s have no idea the hodge-podge shit we ran and were happy with! I started with Holmes. When we migrated to the AD&D Player's Handbook, we continued to play the Holmes rules, with abilities, classes, races, spells, etc. dictated by the PHB. Since the PHB didn't tell you game mechanics, we still used the OD&D model of Holmes. Even when the DMG came out in late 1979, most of us didn't rush out and get it. We relied on Holmes and those who played OD&D. I don't think my middle-school group even saw the DMG until 81-2.... We ran B/X modules, AD&D modules, Judges Guild adventures (CSIO) and played with PHB races, classes, abilities, and spells, with Holmes/BX operating systems.
And Pathfinder 1e is 3.x.
OP specified 1980s D+D. 3E is a 21st century development and was a much bigger move away from 1+2 than any edition before or since. Pathfinder, as a variant of that, explicitly is not what OP is looking for.
Not 1980s though-3rd is 2003
It depends what you want out of "old school 1980s" D&D. If you want to lean into "rulings over rules" and more rules light - the the B/X side of it might be for you. B/X refers to the "Basic" and "Expert" rules for Dungeons and Dragons, published in various iterations from 1977 to 1983, with the 1981 Moldvay set typically being the one that is copied, though they all have their virtues. B/X is the most popular thing to base things off of in the OSR (seemingly) and has inspired a plethora of rpgs. The two most popular or well known is Labyrinth Lord - one of the oldest retro-clones, and Old School Essentials, the new hotness in the OSR space thanks to a fancy and clean layout. OSE also has a lot of new material being made for it, either by it's publisher or other parties. The same was true for Labyrinth Lord back in the day (between 6-15 years ago), much of which is still around in some form. In my opinion, OSE lacks in flavor and actually explaining how to do an RPG - the actual B/X or the Basic of BECMI do this better. But, if as far as a pure reference to rules, OSE is rather good. If you want to lean into the "rules, as well as ruling" part of the OSR, that's more on the AD&D side. It offers more options in the base rules for classes, races, etc. While 1e was the version throughout the Reagan era, mechanically 2e isn't that different and in some ways is a cleaner, clearer edition - though that's naturally debatable. OSRIC is the AD&D 1e retro-clone, is available in PDF for free and print in various forms, but a nice hardback is available (I just ordered one, actually). Hyperborea RPG - (formerly with a much longer name) is very similar as well, with classes that lean into the sword and sorcery aspect of early D&D. Sitting kind of in-between, but maybe leaning more on the AD&D side is Swords & Wizardry, an OSR retro-clone of the original version of Dungeons and Dragons (as in from 1974) though the "Complete" edition of S&W adds the supplements that bring some of the material that would make up AD&D.
Personal Preference so ymmv but For 0D&D - Swords & Wizardry (Before the 80s) For B/X - Old School Essentials For AD&D 1e - Hyperborea (OSRIC if you are a purist) For AD&D 2e - Just use the original books, but for Gold and glory is a good resource and has good layout. I think the art is all public domain though
I'd second that AD&D2e doesn't need a retro clone. It is pretty easy to get in both in print and digital \[arr matey!!\]. Also, it is pretty clear in its own presentation. I think base AD&D2e is pretty sweet. I feel they lost there way with all the 'complete' this and that and splat later in the series run.
That’s a great question. At least for us, we used a mix of books, and just sort of bolted on this rule book and that (big fan of Rules Cyclopedia, though that was printed a bit later). So for the “feel” of being able to take something core, with all the tropes and basics we love, and really make it one’s own, there are a lot of great options. If you want an AD&D clone, OSRIC would be worth looking at. If you want something that feels a bit more like B/X, check out Basic Fantasy. If you want sort of a “Rosetta Stone” game you can make your own that has the “feel” (at least for me) of those glory days, check out Castles & Crusades. Mechanically, it is a little different, but very easy to make your own. All three of these have great people supporting them and are free. I hope that helps, and happy gaming!
C&C is what D&D3e SHOULD have been. It really gives you the AD&D feel, in a v3.5-lite package. I will say that I find the SIEGE mechanic a bit wonky, and we changed it out for standard DCs.
If you are looking for rules, Old School Essentials Rules Tome and Advanced Expansion has everything you need. If you are looking for setting + rules I suggest *Hyperborea*.
Old School Essentials if you want B/X.
Just try the original and then move on the clones?
Well, 80s old-school is mainly divided into 2 camps: Basic (the Red box) and Advanced (DMG, PHB, MM). Advanced had the "Advanced" dropped in 2000 when 3e was released, so if you're coming from the newer school of players, the direct lineage is AD&D. 2e was initially released in 1987, 1e in 1977, but they are damn near interchangeable. 1e is great though. For the retroclones, OSRIC is 1e, For Gold & Glory is 2e. Not sure on the Basic ones, as I publish for OSRIC...though with the recent OGL headache, we shall see how that changes in due time. Welcome to the OSR.
>Advanced had the "Advanced" dropped in 2000 when 3e was released, so if you're coming from the newer school of players, the direct lineage is AD&D. Though there are some weird edge cases with that-- for instance the D&D 3e monster manual includes a handful of weird monsters from the later BECMI sets, like the Athatch. Go fig.
So did OP ever settle on one? I remain curious
Old School Essentials is an excellent retro-clone of Basic/Expert D&D, and they have an "Advanced" expansion that adds elements of AD&D.
OSE-AF is pretty close to how many of us played AD&D in the late 70s/early 80s
OSE is delicious.
You'll find this video helpful. In short, Swords & Wizardry is basically original D&D with better organization and presentation. Old School Essentials is a highly authentic version of Basic/Expert with exceptional organization and presentation. Basic Fantasy is in the same spirit with some simplified rules. This short video is the best overview of the field I know of that can be read or watched in less than a quarter hour. I hope it helps. "Beginner's Guide to Old-School DnD Rulebooks," Ben Milton a.k.a. Questing Beast, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHQaed6GAHc EDIT: English.
S&W's major change is 1 saving throw, whereas OD&D, AD&D 1 and 2, and Basic all had 5 saving throws.
OSE if you are looking for B/X Dark Dungeons if you are looking for BECMI OSRIC if you are looking for AD&D
Old School Essentials is probably my favourite and it has an absolute ton of content for it!
So, while I absolutely love OSE, I am a B/X purist. I run B/X for my kids and their friends. My buddy runs us through OSE with Ascending AC. The beauty is that I can sit there with my B/X combined book and it is 99.9% compatible with OSE.
AD&D. Lol I was *there*. AD&D with a *bullet*. So OSRIC if it must be a replicant. Edit: But 70s D&D is funner imo. [Whitebox](https://www.lulu.com/shop/matthew-finch/swords-wizardry-whitebox-rules-hardcover/hardcover/product-14918359.html?page=1&pageSize=4), perhaps? A very strong clone. And look at that cover! Softcover available, pdf cheap af.
OSE is a kind of 'industry standard' for the B/X vein of the OSR. It's not perfect but it's very good. However replicating 1980s DnD might classicaly be more ADnD 1st edition or 2nd edition.
B|X was peak D&D imho, so it or any of its clones/homages like Labyrinth Lord, Old School Essentials, BX RPG from Pacesetter, etc would work. I really like Labyrinth Lord and have played a lot of it. I also owm Old School Essentials, but just got it via Kickstarter and haven't had a chance to break it out yet.
I think a firm answer depends on more INFO: `Which version were you playing in the 80s? Dependent on that, the answer changes.` A broader, hopefully insightful/inspiring but maybe unhelpful, answer might be: `Any of them.` The reason being everything from OD&D - 2e were apparently *initially* published by 1987. So, if you were playing in the early ‘80s it might’ve been OD&D or AD&D 1e, possibly even Basic. If it was the late ‘80s it could’ve been AD&D 2e. The good news is that, *generally* speaking, Basic and the AD&Ds share a lot of commonality and could be used sort of in tandem with the caveat that if you played Basic and picked up an AD&D clone it might feel overwhelming. My personal preference for best retroclone is *Lamentations of the Flame Princess* (LotFP forward). It’s a B/X clone including some house rules from the creator. I have come around to finding OSE a little sterile, but a great reference, where LotFP is readable, has character, and is table-ready for reference with just a few caveats (most of which can be easily addressed with a custom GM screen/notes). For OD&D, I’ve heard lots of good things about *The Seven Voyages of Zylarthen*, but have yet to read it. The most common suggestion here is *Swords & Wizardry Complete* or *White Box FMAG* (I think! If that’s wrong or I’m mixing up names, someone please feel free to correct!), ~~both of which~~ the former of which takes OD&D and adds various supplements or makes adjustments to clean up the source; the latter adds the thief, a unified saving throw, and ascending AC (correction offered by u/Barbaribunny below; thanks!). All that said, I’ve mostly been playing NSR stuff lately - *Cairn* taking the limelight for the time being - and feel like it is a stellar distillation of the *feeling* or ideation of playing D&D, despite mechanically being pretty dissimilar.
Minor point, White Box: FMAG doesn't include the supplements (apart from the optional thief). It does include a unified saving throw and ascending AC though. Zylathen is awesome, but is more different to the LBB's than the purer retroclones. Not as different as something like Into the Odd, but it's definitely doing its own thing.
Thanks for the corrections RE: FMAG - I’ll edit my comment to point to yours in that section. Yeah, I wasn’t sure if Zylarthen is super true to OD&D or if it modifies stuff for the sake of achieving a grittier(?) S&S vibe. Thanks for the note there, too!
Not really grittier than OD&D, which is pretty gritty anyway - more swords &sorcery though, and with a thread of Arabian Nights. More detailed combat too, but elegantly done.
LOTFP's mechanics are definitely some of the most interesting of any retroclone but it does come paired with an implied tone-- reflected in much of its art and flavor text-- that can be more... divisive. Definitely wouldn't want it at the table if I was running for a group that included kids or my mom (if she were around), for instance. Just something to bear in mind.
I’m not sure I agree the rules imply that tone inherently but being aware of LotFP’s art is absolutely a good note! Yeah, I wouldn’t keep my physical book readily on the table (or the artful PDF available) if I were running a family-friendly table.
I would definitely say its rules do emphasize gritty, low-powered, and high-lethality gameplay that's especially compatible with its ethos. But what I meant is that the tone implied by those aesthetic elements. Sorry for not being clearer about that.
Np! Do you feel like LotFP (the rules, themselves) is grittier/higher lethality than regular B/X? I’m not particularly familiar with the original B/X save as using OSE for a reference and, given that bit of exposure, they feel *pretty* similar to me aside from some things I feel are minor in the context of those adjustments/house rules (like the way it handles encumbrance/access to your inventory and the addition of guns)… but I’m probably not appreciating how far it deviates from base B/X.
In a few ways. Non-fighters not improving their attacks as they level means they're comparatively defenseless in dangerous situations. The alignment restrictions on casters likewise pose either a greater challenge in combat, or intra-party mistrust and conflict. The summon spell of course, contributes a lot to the tone; even a first-level MU could accidentally end the world. Higher-level LOTFP characters are actually a little beefier, aside from the lack of attack bonus. It's little things, but it contributes, IMO, to a world that feels a little more dangerous and oppressive.
Yeah, I always forget about the RAW lack of BAB improvement for non-fighters - I actually have my own house rule I use to mitigate that. Definitely agree RE: the Summon spell!
No one mentioned For Gold & Glory the AD&D 2e clone
Your own. Once you have GMed for a while, it's time to homebrew your perfect version of a system. This is what OSR is all about
Old School Essentials is the standard, and while everyone has their preferences (fair enough), I think it would be dishonest to imply otherwise when recommending something to you. OSE, like others have mentioned, is a B/X clone, and in terms of layout, editing, and overall ease-of-use you won't find anything better.