goblinoidgames.com

Fix dwarves. B/X doesn't allow them to use long bows and two handed swords. LL doesn't allow them to use any two-handed weapons.

Oh, and... fix backstab. As it stands it way too difficult.

As LL was a way of recreating B/X, I wouldn't change a thing. I house rule it up the wazoo (like we did BX back in the day), but I don't think its "broken". In other words, as a recreation of BX, I think Dan did hit it out of the park.

If anything, I'd change the clerics to not gain spells until 2nd level (just to make it more authentic) but then I'd house-rule that away.

That said, I also like to play DCC, S&W, and whatnot which are other interpretations of early D&D. They sometimes have common house rules baked in and that's fine (as I tend to like the rules they choose) but that still doesn't make B/X broken.

AEC, on the other hand, is a frickin masterpiece. It is what AD&D promised to be and never was. I prefer AEC over AD&D (and OSRIC and other recreations). I also house rule it up the wazoo (as anyone who plays in my games can tell you).

One question that I get all the time, especially from players who have never played a retro-clone, is: what can I do on my turn?

The way combat rounds worked in B/X and AD&D was a bit klunky:

• First, you go around the table and everyone moves.
• Then, you go back around the table and everyone gets to make missile attacks.
• Then, you go around the table a third time and everyone gets to cast spells.
• Finally, you go around the table and everyone gets to make a melee attack (Whew!).

I would recommend simplifying this to something like: each player, on his/her turn, gets to move (up to their encounter movement) and act, in whatever order they like. Or they can give up their act and run.

That would be much easier to explain.

Hope this helps.

greyarea wrote:As LL was a way of recreating B/X, I wouldn't change a thing. I house rule it up the wazoo (like we did BX back in the day), but I don't think its "broken". In other words, as a recreation of BX, I think Dan did hit it out of the park.

If anything, I'd change the clerics to not gain spells until 2nd level (just to make it more authentic) but then I'd house-rule that away.

That said, I also like to play DCC, S&W, and whatnot which are other interpretations of early D&D. They sometimes have common house rules baked in and that's fine (as I tend to like the rules they choose) but that still doesn't make B/X broken.

AEC, on the other hand, is a frickin masterpiece. It is what AD&D promised to be and never was. I prefer AEC over AD&D (and OSRIC and other recreations). I also house rule it up the wazoo (as anyone who plays in my games can tell you).

As to clerics waiting until level 2 for spells, I don't think that's a popular view. But I like it because that's how I started with Moldvay in the 80's.
I'd fix Dwarves - let them use a battle axe. Otherwise they gave a grim choice- use a hammer or hand axe for only d6 damage , which weakens them as a fighter, or go with a longsword- a not very " dwarfy" weapon.

Other then that, very little I would change. Perhaps a small boost to Thief skills for a high Dex and a bonus spell for clerics and magic users for Wis/ Int.

Strength gives such a good bonus for combat, damage and hit. Dexterity gives a bonus to missiles and armor class. Make the other attributes valuable too.
Starting thief skills suck anyway.

Better rules for fighting giants. More or less requiring human-sized combatants to scale, leap about and around or fly over giant foe to cause lethal damage in melee. That doesn't prevent ground bound party members from attempting to wound or disable the great beast's lower extremities, or making lethal magical/missile attacks against the giant. At the same time giants can issue non-magical area attacks, not only slams, stomps, swings and cleaves but multiple victim impalement with a single thrust and tossed boulders and large rocks crushing multiple foes at once.