Labyrinth Lord Vs. B/X

[Jorgo]

What's better, Labyrinth Lord as written, or B/X as written? Easier, more straightforward, more balanced?

[Thrudd]

They're basically identical. Labyrinth Lord is probably better organized, since they collected the two booklets in one document. It uses slightly different numbers for XP and different level caps (I think Expert went up to 14, but LL goes up to 20 for the human classes), but there's no meaningful difference. You could get much the same with Rules-cyclopedia - that's all BECM collected in one book.

[Jorgo]

why are the XP requirements changed? like cleric needs 1560 instead of 1500, that seems frivolous

[Thrudd]

why are the XP requirements changed? like cleric needs 1560 instead of 1500, that seems frivolous

I think it's a copyright thing. Like they can't legally make an exact copy of the original game.

[hamlet]

They are effectively identical except for slight modifications needed for copy write reasons. LL is more akin to BXC than just BX.

You'd be just as good snagging a copy of the Rules Cyclopedia or Dark Dungeons retro-clone. I highly recommend them, actually.

[2D8HP]

Slightly different rolls needed for success for the Thief class as well.

Which to use comes down to the players, if they're cheapskates who like PDF's than Labyrinth Lord is the choice given the free PDF link (http://goblinoidgames.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/GBD1001_no_art.zip) (and maybe they'll order a print copy like I did to support a service).

If they're traditionalists, then go with B/X (or '94 "Classic", or '77 "Basic")

The 1977 "bluebook" Basic rules, were the most different, but not that much, and the '81, '83, and '91 rules are very close to each other (the '94 rules are the '91 rules, just with a different cover and name).

It's all good.

[Anonymouswizard]

Slightly different rolls needed for success for the Thief class as well.

Which to use comes down to the players, if they're cheapskates who like PDF's than Labyrinth Lord is the choice given the free PDF link (http://goblinoidgames.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/GBD1001_no_art.zip) (and maybe they'll order a print copy like I did to support a service).

If they're traditionalists, then go with B/X (or '94 "Classic", or '77 "Basic")

The 1977 "bluebook" Basic rules, were the most different, but not that much, and the '81, '83, and '91 rules are very close to each other (the '94 rules are the '91 rules, just with a different cover and name).

It's all good.

And if they like something that is 'like B/X, but with a couple of basic changes' they'll look into Lamentations of the Flame Princess. Which at least in the new version does have significant differences (there's the fact that only Fighters get increasing attack bonuses, but a lot of damaging spells have been removed from the game as well), as well as relatively minor ones (Elves advance faster than they used to, but they are also just 'Magic-User plus' now instead of Fighters/Magic-Users with extra benefits). Plus it's another 'free pdf version' one.

[2D8HP]

And if they like something that is 'like B/X, but with a couple of basic changes' they'll look into Lamentations of the Flame Princess...


I quite like LotFP take as well, and except for that "whole other hemisphere" thing, I'd like to play ar your table AW!

[Jorgo]

Ok so I want to play LL, but i have a problem. Doubling xp every level seems like a HUGE ****ING AMOUNT of xp. would it work to replace that with LV 1 requirement x current level for xp?

[hamlet]

Ok so I want to play LL, but i have a problem. Doubling xp every level seems like a HUGE ****ING AMOUNT of xp. would it work to replace that with LV 1 requirement x current level for xp?

It's a lot, and it's intentional. Remember that PC's get XP for treasure recovered, not just monsters killed. Probably better to keep it that way else they'll just fly through levels too quickly.

[Anonymouswizard]

I quite like LotFP take as well, and except for that "whole other hemisphere" thing, I'd like to play ar your table AW!

Unfortunately I suspect my science fiction is exactly the type you hate (apart from the very small almost of Planetary Romance that I enjoy).

Any, gotta go, looking into seeing if I can get a copy of Space 1889.

[Khedrac]

Ok so I want to play LL, but i have a problem. Doubling xp every level seems like a HUGE ****ING AMOUNT of xp. would it work to replace that with LV 1 requirement x current level for xp?

Something to remember is that in BECM D&D if a creature is worth 6 xp it is worth 6 xp whether you are level 1 or level 36, there are no fiddly calculations where the xp value of an encounter based on the level of the characters having it. (Also unlike AD&D it's xp does not vary with its hit points, again BECM is simpler.)

Also, as hamlet said, characters get xp for treasure recovered - which is normally supposed to be about 90% of their xp (note, magic items don't have much of a value for this calculation unless one can find a buyer - which is very very rare). The next factor is number of adventures per level - one of the DMs books (Master, I think) has a table showing how much xp needs to be handed out for the characters to level at the chosen rate - anything from 3 to 10 adventrues per level. (Admittedly, once one gets past 9th level the xp/level stops doubling and remains fixed.) Probably my biggest complaint about 3.5 D&D is that low level characters level up too fast, this comes from having player earlier versions for many years setting my expectations.

[Jorgo]

Ok another question: Monster Attack rolls improve by every HD, but even Fighter Attack rolls progress much more slowly. How do the PCs make up for it?

[hamlet]

Ok another question: Monster Attack rolls improve by every HD, but even Fighter Attack rolls progress much more slowly. How do the PCs make up for it?

They don't. Monsters have an edge. That's what makes them dangerous and makes adventurers who show up in a dungeon with only 4 people fools and/or ground meat.

Old School dungeoneering involved parties starting at about 6 people and then started adding in hirelings, followers, and other assorted hangers-on. Smart mages probably bought themselves a war or guard dog at first level. It let them be pretty much as powerful as a fighter in terms of combat without actually risking their skin for it. Plus, what else were they gonna do with all their starting gold?

Also remember that number inflation in this version of the game is less of a thing. Though the monsters have a bit of an edge, it's not a huge one. And monsters also plateau if I recall the tables correctly, though that might just be my CRS acting up.

[Knaight]

Old School dungeoneering involved parties starting at about 6 people and then started adding in hirelings, followers, and other assorted hangers-on. Smart mages probably bought themselves a war or guard dog at first level. It let them be pretty much as powerful as a fighter in terms of combat without actually risking their skin for it. Plus, what else were they gonna do with all their starting gold?
Hence the simpler rules for combat and the like - more modern D&D combat systems get really bloated really fast once the number of entities in a fight starts stacking up (with a notable exception for 4e, although that still holds on the player side). Older D&D is still pretty sluggish compared to most modern systems actually designed for large groups, but it's at least functional as a wargame if you're willing to have the multi-hour battles.


Unfortunately I suspect my science fiction is exactly the type you hate (apart from the very small almost of Planetary Romance that I enjoy).

Any, gotta go, looking into seeing if I can get a copy of Space 1889.

Eh. I'd recommend Space 1889 to 2d8HP in a heartbeat, and I have a pretty good recommendation track record there*. That's at least one point of probable overlap.

*Mostly on account of Warbirds.

[2D8HP]

...I'd recommend Space 1889 to 2d8HP in a heartbeat, and I have a pretty good recommendation track record there*. That's at least one point of probable overlap.

*Mostly on account of Warbirds.


Spot on guys, I bought the original back in the 1980's, and bought the 2013 version last year.

:smile:

[Anonymouswizard]

Eh. I'd recommend Space 1889 to 2d8HP in a heartbeat, and I have a pretty good recommendation track record there*. That's at least one point of probable overlap.

*Mostly on account of Warbirds.

Yeah, I mentioned S1889 because I knew 2D8HP owns it (he mentioned it in a thread several months back I think), and I do also have a liking for hopeful retro-science fiction. I just have a tendency to run harder stuff, I'm event he sort of person who'll try to harden Rocket Age's science (yeah, I know, trying to set fire to an ocean).

Really, I more like the idea of Space 1889 because I like hopeful Victorian-era stories, and it looks like a fun setting, than as science fiction itself.