B/X Mashup: 0e

[paladinn]

Hola all,

It seems to be a given, or at least widely accepted, that B/X is both the simplest And most self-contained edition of D&D. Even OD&D/0e is more complex and convoluted, especially when the supplements are factored in.

With that in mind, using B/X as a chassis and foundation, what elements of 0e+Supplements have you used to extend or "supplement" your B/X game(s)? How did it work out? Mechanics details always welcome:)

Gratzi!

[Yora]

I think the main difference between Gygax D&D and Moldvay Basic is actually the comprehensibility. Gygax was never great with presenting the rules, and with the first game he really was just doing trial and error. I commonly come across the claim that the first game was something that you had to get taught by someone who already knows it, and the rulebooks are just for looking up numbers.
Later Holmes took a shot at making it more accessible, and the third attempt by Moldvay was what really took off as a success.
People recommending the 1981 Moldvay version primarily seem to do so not because of the specific rules, but because it's the easiest way to learn the game.

(In 1983, Mentzer made another version with an actual proper tutorial to introduce new players to the mechanics instead of just throwing the plain rules at them, but that also makes it harder to look up specific things you want to check quickly, so the 1981 B/X version is the most popularly used one.)

[paladinn]

I think the main difference between Gygax D&D and Moldvay Basic is actually the comprehensibility. Gygax was never great with presenting the rules, and with the first game he really was just doing trial and error. I commonly come across the claim that the first game was something that you had to get taught by someone who already knows it, and the rulebooks are just for looking up numbers.
Later Holmes took a shot at making it more accessible, and the third attempt by Moldvay was what really took off as a success.
People recommending the 1981 Moldvay version primarily seem to do so not because of the specific rules, but because it's the easiest way to learn the game.

(In 1983, Mentzer made another version with an actual proper tutorial to introduce new players to the mechanics instead of just throwing the plain rules at them, but that also makes it harder to look up specific things you want to check quickly, so the 1981 B/X version is the most popularly used one.)

So back to the thread.. Are there elements of 0e and/or the supplements that you have brought "forward" into B/X? How has that worked for you?

[thirdkingdom]

So back to the thread.. Are there elements of 0e and/or the supplements that you have brought "forward" into B/X? How has that worked for you?

Old School Essentials from Necrotic Gnome has an "Advanced" supplement that introduces a bunch of 0e/1e style classes, as well as race and class/multi/dual classing options.

[paladinn]

Old School Essentials from Necrotic Gnome has an "Advanced" supplement that introduces a bunch of 0e/1e style classes, as well as race and class/multi/dual classing options.

Not a fan of OSE. The way the game has been marketed.. separate books for classes, spells, etc.. seems like a big cash grab. A 14 level limit? No thanks. And some of their takes on 1e classes, especially the Ranger, are missing a lot. No favored enemy/ "giant-class" bonus? That's the Ranger's "thing".

I'm asking if a DM has had a B/X game into which s/he has folding in some 0e-isms. The way some classes/concepts were intro'd in OD&D was very different than what was done in B/X. Just wondered if/how it worked out.