The main thing he wants to know is how much it's worth, say to a collector. And I myself am interested in finding out how much as well so I could make him a reasonable offer.
Unfortunately, my internet skills in such a field are greatly lacking. Anyone here got any idea?
I think I paid about 20 bucks for mine
ebay has them at 6 to 20 dollars US
Chatdemon, I'm not too hot on the older stuff - it all happened years before I started playing RPGs, so the first thing I played was 3e (don'tshootmedon'tshootme) :P
For the record, the Rules Cyclopedia is a classic/basic D&D book, not ad&d 2e.
Indeed! And its a great book!
I am wondering if it could be appropriate to refer to Classic D&D editions as:
Classic 1e: OD&D by Gary Gygax
Classic 2e: Everything else.
Thoughts?
Håvard
I am wondering if it could be appropriate to refer to Classic D&D editions as:
Classic 1e: OD&D by Gary Gygax
Classic 2e: Everything else.
Thoughts?
Håvard
I've heard it described as follows:
1e: 1974 set
2e: Holmes Basic set
3e: Moldvay/Cook B/X
4e: Mentzer BECMI
5e: that black box... I stopped paying attention at this point
But none of that is official, AFAIK.
I've heard it described as follows:
1e: 1974 set
2e: Holmes Basic set
3e: Moldvay/Cook B/X
4e: Mentzer BECMI
5e: that black box... I stopped paying attention at this point
But none of that is official, AFAIK.
That one is more detailed, but if you look at the actual rule differences many of them are too similar. I'm not sure about Holmes, but anything later could easily be the same edition.
The fun thing about my version is that 3E becomes the third edition of both the Advanced line and the non-advanced line.
Havard
OD&D: The original white box books and their supplements.
Holmes: The Holmes basic set
Classic D&D: Moldvay/Cook, Mentzer, the RC, etc
AD&D 1e: I don't exclude the late 1e books (UA, The Survival Guides)
AD&D 2e: Though sometimes I'll add the PO (Players/DM's Option) for the late era books
D&D 3e: I don't really bother differentiating between 3.0 and 3.5, they are the same game to me.
That one is more detailed, but if you look at the actual rule differences many of them are too similar. I'm not sure about Holmes, but anything later could easily be the same edition.
Right. I guess what I had in mind was different packaging of the rules, rather than changes in the rules themselves.
IIRC, the Holmes edition had fairly significant differences (well, I suppose that depends on what you consider significant) from what chatdemon calls Classic D&D. While dwarves and halflings could only be fighting men, and elves could only be fighter/magic-users, they did not have separate experience tables, implying a distinction between race and class. Also, the Holmes edition is the only edition to have five alignments: lawful good, lawful evil, neutral, chaotic good, and chaotic evil.
So in terms of actual rules, I think I'd agree with chatdemon's categorization.
Right. I guess what I had in mind was different packaging of the rules, rather than changes in the rules themselves.
The BECMI rules introduced high level game, which wasn't much stressed in the previous versions, AFAIK.
The Black Box/Rules Cyclopedia/Wrath of the Immortals dealt mostly with a reorganization of the existing materials. IIRC, it also introduced specialty priests and standardized the skill system from the Gazetteers.
No great differences, though.
Classic Line:
1e: OD&D
1,5e: Holmes
2e: B/X Cook/Moldway
2.5e: Mentzer and beyond
3e&3.5: D20 Era D&D
Advanced Line:
1e: AD&D1e
1.5e: AD&D1e Post Unearthed Arcana
2e: AD&D2e
2.5e: AD&D2e Post Players/DM's Options
3e/3.5e: D20 era D&D
This is just for fun though
Havard
This is just for fun though
Indeed -- while in some (limited) sense 3e is based on AD&D (especially 1e and Player's/DM Options), it is very different from OD&D -- AFAIK, the only aspect of OD&D that is present in 3e is the handling of monstrous PCs.
Indeed -- while in some (limited) sense 3e is based on AD&D (especially 1e and Player's/DM Options), it is very different from OD&D -- AFAIK, the only aspect of OD&D that is present in 3e is the handling of monstrous PCs.
I assume you are using the term OD&D to refer to the entire classic D&D line now, not just the 1974 Gygax edition.
As for legacies of Classic D&D in 3E, this is a touchy subject on an OOP board I suspect, but I will risk it:
* Monsterous PCs (First appeared in the PC series)
* Feats (Likely derived from Weapon Mastery)
* PrCs (Classic D&D had Paladins, Avengers etc as high level options)
* Racial Paragons (Unearthed Arcana has these)
* Race classes (Savage Species++ has these)
* Epic Levels (This kind of play reminds me of high level Classic campaigns)
* Variant classes (Rake, Forrester, Ethengar Horse Warrior..these are some early examples of what 3E calls "variant classes")
Obviously there are AD&D roots to these things as well, but that does not mean Classic D&D did not have an influence. There could be more too, but I'm too tired to think of any...
Havard
I assume you are using the term OD&D to refer to the entire classic D&D line now, not just the 1974 Gygax edition.
Sorry, I meant the edition I am used to -- BECMI and RC/WotI.
The earlier editions I don't know enough.
* Monsterous PCs (First appeared in the PC series)
Yes (if you mean monster races done as in Orcs of Thar rather than as in Book of Humanoids).
* Feats (Likely derived from Weapon Mastery)
Extremely unlikely. Many combat feats, like Whirlwind Attack, Alertness, Improved Initiative, and weapon groups proficiency are straight out of Player's Option: Combat & Tactics and Skills & Powers or DM's Option: High Level Campaigns.
* PrCs (Classic D&D had Paladins, Avengers etc as high level options)
That's possible, though AD&D kits might have been another sources. And Dragonlance Knights of Solamnia have the same structure, IIRC.
* Racial Paragons (Unearthed Arcana has these)
These have little to do with the race/classes of OD&D, IMO, and even less with the monstrous classes.
* Race classes (Savage Species++ has these)
This is the same as monstrous PCs! Or, else, monstrous PC were available in AD&D too, though not as racial classes.
* Epic Levels (This kind of play reminds me of high level Classic campaigns)
Once more, I think most of this stuff comes straight from AD&D's "High Level Campaigns" rather than the Master Set.
* Variant classes (Rake, Forrester, Ethengar Horse Warrior..these are some early examples of what 3E calls "variant classes")
Oriental Adventures, Unearthed Arcana and Dragonlance also had variant classes. And, anyway, most variant classes in 3e seems to have drawn little from existing sources.
Obviously there are AD&D roots to these things as well, but that does not mean Classic D&D did not have an influence. There could be more too, but I'm too tired to think of any...
IMO, there was very little influence from OD&D (or AD&D 2e, for that matter) -- 3e was mostly done with a general AD&D 1e-ish feel (half-orcs, barbarians, monks, cantrips/orisons, "Manual of the Planes", "Unearthed Arcana", etc.) and a lot of Players/DM Option stuff (miniature-oriented/tactical combat, feats, attacks of opportunity).
GP
The most obvious classic D&D influence on 3e to me is the unified ability score modifiers. The rejigged the numbers, but 3e clearly looks more like classic D&D here than AD&D.