Let's talk about Basic Fantasy

cranebump · August 13, 2014, 02:49:50 PM

I'm using BFRPG over B/X mainly because everything is free and downloadable, everything you need is in one book, there are supplements, and, most importantly for me, ascending AC. I can run descending, but ascending just makes more sense to me. I am already using OS modules with the system. All I do is flip monster AC. That's it.

But if you're happy with B/X? No reason to change (except maybe to Labyrinth Lord, which combines all the B/X stuff, in near-perfect replica form, into one tome--I like it everything in one place, when I can get it that way).

cranebump · August 13, 2014, 02:55:16 PM

Quote from: Molotov;779234Bastards. Now I'm thinking about pulling some of my favorite 5e bits into Basic Fantasy ...

Backgrounds would probably work to an extent. You'd most likely have to important the skill system with it, perhaps use the skill system in the game and maybe grant Advantage using any skills the BG gives (for BG's that provide skill training).

K Peterson · August 13, 2014, 03:50:22 PM

It's been a few years since I've looked at BF, but it left me with a good impression. (B/X is the only edition of D&D I'd ever want to run these days, so I've looked at a few B/X clones over the years).

I was tempted to use BF for a campaign back in 2011, but B/X won out. Maybe I'll actually give it a shot one of these days.

Skywalker · August 13, 2014, 04:13:01 PM

Quote from: cranebump;779217We're running classic Greyhawk stuff with BFRPG. Using a lot of the supplements, dropping the save system for an S&W style 1 number system and tacking on some wounds rules. Fun!

FWIW the Ability Rolls rule in Basic Fantasy on page 141 is almost identical to S&S 1 save system.

I use this rule to make all Saving Throws into Ability Roll. As such, they are effected by Ability Bonuses rather Class Bonuses. Its actually more streamlined than S&W and doesn't require a second book.

cranebump · August 13, 2014, 06:26:13 PM

Quote from: Skywalker;779285FWIW the Ability Rolls rule in Basic Fantasy on page 141 is almost identical to S&S 1 save system.

I use this rule to make all Saving Throws into Ability Roll. As such, they are effected by Ability Bonuses rather Class Bonuses. Its actually more streamlined than S&W and doesn't require a second book.

Yeah, it's only 2 points higher for level 1, on average. I feel like using the save roll is actually much more fair. I'll have to ask the co-GMs about it.

Skywalker · August 13, 2014, 06:29:03 PM

Quote from: cranebump;779347Yeah, it's only 2 points higher for level 1, on average. I feel like using the save roll is actually much more fair. I'll have to ask the co-GMs about it.

Cool.

And as for class bonuses to saving throws in S&W, I found that ability bonuses mirrored these pretty closely (and made more sense). Fighters tended to have high Str and Con, so had better saves against poisons and the like.

Just Another Snake Cult · August 14, 2014, 12:45:33 PM

I had the pleasure of playing in a couple of games ran by Basic Fantasy creator Chris Gonnerman at a small local con. He's a great DM and a very friendly, cool guy.

Molotov · August 14, 2014, 01:53:41 PM

I placed an order for the full print line yesterday - looking forward to Sat delivery. $20 with shipping, thanks to Amazon Prime.

cranebump · August 14, 2014, 05:10:00 PM

Quote from: Molotov;779626I placed an order for the full print line yesterday - looking forward to Sat delivery. $20 with shipping, thanks to Amazon Prime.

My contribution to BFRPG was an order of 10 books, which I gave out to players in my local (now defunct) youth RPG group. I hope they use them someday.

Grey Wanderer · August 14, 2014, 07:23:49 PM

I had a crazy idea to order twenty copies of the rules and hand them out on Halloween last year... If I can ever convince myself to drop $100 on something so silly, I still just might...

Matt · August 14, 2014, 09:20:17 PM

Okay, I'll bite: what is "ascending AC"?

I assume AC = Armor Class.

cranebump · August 14, 2014, 09:30:10 PM

Quote from: Matt;779759Okay, I'll bite: what is "ascending AC"?

I assume AC = Armor Class.

Ascending AC is basically 3.5 and later Armor Class. Starts with base 10 and goes up. Descending AC, or Armor Class for 2E and before, starts at 9 or 10, depending on the system, but goes DOWN the better armored you are. In essence, AC0=AC20. Stuff that is VERY hard to hit has AC's in the negatives (what was Lloth's avatar? -6?). Various ways to play using it (often requiring a chart). So, basically, in them olden days lower was better.

Skywalker · August 14, 2014, 09:36:29 PM

Quote from: Matt;779759Okay, I'll bite: what is "ascending AC"?

I assume AC = Armor Class.

Yep. It's essentially the same Mathis descending AC, but it allows you to drop the need for a "to hit" chart as the AC is the actual number you have to roll.

Matt · August 14, 2014, 09:46:35 PM

Quote from: cranebump;779762Ascending AC is basically 3.5 and later Armor Class. Starts with base 10 and goes up. Descending AC, or Armor Class for 2E and before, starts at 9 or 10, depending on the system, but goes DOWN the better armored you are. In essence, AC0=AC20. Stuff that is VERY hard to hit has AC's in the negatives (what was Lloth's avatar? -6?). Various ways to play using it (often requiring a chart). So, basically, in them olden days lower was better.

No THAC0? And they still call it D&D? What!

THAC0 is deeply ingrained in my brain.

Matt · August 14, 2014, 09:48:34 PM

Quote from: Skywalker;779765Yep. It's essentially the same Mathis descending AC, but it allows you to drop the need for a "to hit" chart as the AC is the actual number you have to roll.

Which Mathis, Johnny or Samantha? Johnny's a better singer (based on that "Thing Called Love" movie), but I had a big crush on Samantha circa "Pump Up the Volume."

Sounds easier, I guess, though I must say I never knew anyone who needed a chart for THAC0. Don't know if I could get used to AC being better at 10 than 0.