I've been thinking of running a campaign using the Swords and Wizardry rules (and still on the fence on whether to use the core or complete rules). Interested in other poster's experience with the system.

It inspired me to write my own rules supplement, and frankly I am not a rules guy. I think because the core rules perfectly capture the core essence of classic D&D and makes it clear how you can build on that to make it your own D&D for your campaign.

I prefer the whitebox rules to complete.  I think it's easier to add stuff you want, then remove stuff you don't.

Quote from: RunningLaser;899886I prefer the whitebox rules to complete.  I think it's easier to add stuff you want, then remove stuff you don't.

Yes. 110% yes.

The best thing about S&W WB is that it's exquisitely customizable and easy to tinker with. It's a box of tools you can use to build the game you want.

I seem to be in the minority, but I think it's a terrible system. There's a reason OD&D got dumped after 4 years. And the single saving throw just makes it even worse.

If you don't want AD&D, then there's a number of B/X games, all of which are far superior to S&W. Or if you want to use a S&W based game, try Blood & Treasure or Crypts & Things, they largely take the suckiness out of S&W

I greatly prefer the S&W: White Box rules. It's my default D&D.

FOR ME, if I am going to go "whole hog" with an AD&D clone, I might as well go Castles & Crusades. In general, I haven't found S&W "core" or "complete" to be any more engaging than Basic Fantasy, LL or OSRIC.

I suspect the preference for one retro-clone vs. another is based on how closely that clone emphasizes the stuff that matters most to you as a DM and what feel you want at the table. FOR ME, I want my OSR D&D to be very raw, swords & sorcery with system that's malleable and freeform.

But hey, the differences in OSR clones are minor flavor variations so go with whatever tastes best for your crew.

I played more than a dozen four-hour sessions of a face-to-face, megadungeon-based S&W: White Box game back in 2010 after not playing D&D since the early 1990s. Had a blast and thought it was a great re-introduction to the hobby. Simple, fast, reinforced the play style that I like - thinking your way through problems, not relying exclusively on melee or stats. Eventually we moved on to a 1E game, but I loved that S&W:WB game.

Anyway, I've also played in Matt's Mythrus Tower megadungeon game in Texas at NTRPG Con several times. I think he technically runs S&W: Complete, but I'm not sure it matters. People show up with a character of whatever version of the game they play and Matt rolls with it. Usually there are like 10-20 people at the table and he does a good job of keeping things moving. The system definitely doesn't bog down, but he knows it like the back of his hand and improvises fearlessly. If you're ever in the area, it's worth checking out.

I like S&W, White Box is my prefered version and I think "White Box Heroes" is a great expansion for added classic character classes.

Crypts & Things does S&W one better.

I like the single saving throw. I also still play 0D&D from the original books.

Quote from: RunningLaser;899886I prefer the whitebox rules to complete.  I think it's easier to add stuff you want, then remove stuff you don't.

I think the white box is missing too much as it only cover what the three original booklet covers. It been my observation that what most people recognize as classic D&D is the Corebooks plus Greyhawk which is roughly what S&W core rules are.

Quote from: JeremyR;899889I seem to be in the minority, but I think it's a terrible system. There's a reason OD&D got dumped after 4 years. And the single saving throw just makes it even worse.

Well the single saving throw of Swords & Wizardry has modifier for each class for specific types of saves. For example magic-users get +2 save against spell. If you look at B/X and clones (which you recommended below). you will see that the multiple saving throw categories are all roughly spaced evenly apart. For example a 8th level magic-user gets need 12 or better against spells to save but his worst save is a 14 or better against dragon breath. So you could rework it as single save where the magic user has a 14 save at 8th level but has a +2 bonus against spells, a +3 bonus against poison or being turned to stone, etc.

Quote from: JeremyR;899889If you don't want AD&D, then there's a number of B/X games, all of which are far superior to S&W. Or if you want to use a S&W based game, try Blood & Treasure or Crypts & Things, they largely take the suckiness out of S&W

There indeed more complete clone of classic D&D out there. But they all pick an choose from the different editions to produce their list of stuff (classes, spells, items, and monsters). Along with specific rules like whether race is a class or an option, AC is ascending or descending.

What Swords & Wizardry does is distills it down to the absolute basics. White Book for the original core books, and Core for the original plus Greyhawk. Plus it has a nicely formatted rtf document that you can easily edit with a word processor to make your campaign's rules. It is deliberately not meant to be exciting in the way ACKS is or Blood & Treasure.



The thing about Swords & Wizardry Core rules is that
Most classic D&D games prefer to pick a race and then a class over race as class.

Quote from: Chainsaw;899905Anyway, I've also played in Matt's Mythrus Tower megadungeon game in Texas at NTRPG Con several times. I think he technically runs S&W: Complete, but I'm not sure it matters. People show up with a character of whatever version of the game they play and Matt rolls with it. Usually there are like 10-20 people at the table and he does a good job of keeping things moving. The system definitely doesn't bog down, but he knows it like the back of his hand and improvises fearlessly. If you're ever in the area, it's worth checking out.

When it comes to the family of D&D retro-clones we are talking inches as far as the gulf between any two sets of rules goes. One reason I think that the OSR has thrived is that the normal default for any RPG campaign is to kitbash whatever shit looks good to run the campaign with. People rarely stick with RAW or within the "approved" product line. It not always easy to see how to take a GURPS Supplement and shoehorn it into a Runequest campaign, but with the OSR being centered around classic D&D it becomes a lot easier to see how you can take ACKS' domain system throw it into Pundit's Arrow of Indra while taking most of your rules from Blood & Treasure and running Lamentations of the Flame Princess, Death Frost Doom as an adventure.

Quote from: estar;899935When it comes to the family of D&D retro-clones we are talking inches as far as the gulf between any two sets of rules goes.

Estar's right. There's only a dick's difference between any of the retro-clones.

Just pick your favorite and play with it!

S&W uses OD&D as a base; White Box does "plain" OD&D (which is deliberately vague at times and thus perfect for hacking), while Complete uses material from the OD&D supplement line (and ends up feeling a bit like a leaner, meaner AD&D 1e).

I used Complete to run Benoist's Marmoreal Tomb (Gygax Magazine #3 IIRC) and we had grand old time. It was probably the first time many people in my group got to play "TSR" D&D RAW — most got their start with 2e but houseruled the hell out of it; full HP at 1st level, spontaneous casting, etc. — and while a couple were turned off, well, I had more than enough of a group to keep going. Even after the dungeon swallowed 7 PCs in a single session (one guy rolled three character sheets that night).

I've had a ton of fun with S&W, but you can put me down as another vote for "whatever edition or clone floats your boat." If you want straight OD&D, S&W White Box (or Delving Deeper, or Labyrinth Lord with the Original Edition Companion) will do. If you want pared-down AD&D, S&W Complete (or Labyrinth Lord with the Advanced Edition Companion). And if you want something else, well, there are more OSR games out there than you can shake at 10' pole at.

For curiosity's sake, what sort of game are you thinking of running?

How many did you lose to the Stirges?  What killed the most people?

Damn, let's see if I recall. I lost three to the stirges, I think, but I'm sure they were the chief cause of death. One or two to the wolves. One got pelted to death by kobold sling fire. Oh yeah, and one thief tried to climb up the entrance, failed the climb walls roll, failed a save and fell to his death.

Dungeon got a rep as a PC killer in my group. A fun time was had by those who braved the death of their first PCs!