Hi guys. Probably an old question, but I was just curious, can anyone lay out the differences between the 3 sets content-wise? I know the Saving Throw difference. But what are the others? I would like to play an OD&D game with my brother, who i can't believe just agreed to play just for the fun of it, he being a big 3.x guy. I read through the 3 core OD&D books, and holy crap is it a mess to understand. I know White Box is the same, essentially, in that it doesn't draw from any other supplements, and that Core draws some stuff from supplements. As such, I would like to stick to White Box, as it is just the core 3 OD&D books. However, what if anything is different other than saves and XP progression between the White Box and OD&D such that I couldn't say I had an authentic OD&D game with my brother while using the White Box? Is the Core Book that different than White Box? Is there a comparison chart somewhere you could refer me to?

Thx!

Think of S&W White Box as the OD&D rules with a cleaned-up layout, complete rewrite of the text, and very few targeted differences from the original (one saving throw).

S&W Core is White Box + selected elements of Supplement I Greyhawk, like different polyhedrals for damage (all d6s in White Box) and the like. The differences are not that wide in that one looks more houseruled than the other, but this is still the same game essentially.

It really depends what you want to with your game. Some people who really want to stick to the origins will obviously go for White Box. I'm more of the experimental guy: I want the base essence of the game and build on it with my own house rules and make the game mine. The Core rules work great for me (and I would tell you I run an authentic game of OD&D nevertheless. It's the spirit of the game that matters, not the particulars of the rules).

After double checking for specifics I found this from Philotomy:

QuoteS&W:Core is similar to the 1974 "0e" rules with some additions from later rules supplements. Hit dice are slightly different, but remain d6 based. Monster hit dice are d8. Other differences include saving throws (S&W uses a "single category saving throw"), slightly different prime requisite bonuses, different XP charts (although they're similar), different (but low-powered) attribute bonuses, and a "flip-AC" system (you choose which approach you prefer: high=good or low=good). It has expanded spell lists and monsters (i.e. includes material from the supplemental rules), and uses the supplemental rules for XP awards. Weapons do variable amounts of damage. Monsters do too, and may have multiple attacks (e.g. claw/claw/bite).

S&W:White Box is similar to the 1974 rules without additions from later supplements. All hit dice (monsters and PCs) are d6-based. It, too, uses the "single category saving throw." XP progression is slightly different. Ability bonuses are closer to the original 0e rules. Spell lists are similar to the 0e rules, without some of the spells from later supplements. Monsters typically have a single attack and do d6 damage, with a few exceptions. The "flip-AC" system is used.

Edit - Source.

Honestly, S&W Core looks far more like 77 Blue Basic or 79 red basic than it does 74 D&D.

No castle building, wrong to hit advancement...

0E D&D combat table:
  M 1-5  6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26+
   C 1-4  5-8   9-12 13-16 17-20 21+
AC F 1-3  4-6   7-9  10-12 13-15 16+
 2   17   15    12    10     8    5  
 3   16   14    11     9     7    4
 4   15   13    10     8     6    3
 5   14   12     9     7     5    2
 6   13   11     8     6     4    1
 7   12   10     7     5     3    1
 8   11    9     6     4     2    1
 9   10    8     5     3     1    1

AC HD ≤1  1+1  2-3 3-4 4-6 6-8 9-10 11+
 2   17   16   15  13  12  11   9   7
 3   16   15   14  12  11  10   8   6
 4   15   14   13  11  10   9   7   5
 5   14   13   12  10   9   8   6   4
 6   13   12   11   9   8   7   5   3
 7   12   11   10   8   7   6   4   2
 8   11   10    9   7   6   5   3   1
 9   10    9    8   6   5   4   2   0
No baronies rules.

-1 HP/die is supposed to be con 3-6, and +1 HP/die is con 15+; S&W Core shows 8- and 13+.

I can't find S&W Whitebox as a free PDF... so I can't compare it. (Then again, I'm not looking too hard.)

The Whitebox pdf is linked on this page.

Whitebox: Grabbed it, skimmed it.

Handles Elves correctly, has only the core 3 (Fighter, Wizard, Cleric), still has the attack bonus problem, includes lots of options not in 0E core.

Uses 6-/15+ instead of 8-/13+.

Otherwise, my above comments apply.

Closer to 0E than any of the others I've seen. Looks like a rationalized progression on it, tho' combat is much faster progression than 0E as written, and ignoring chainmail.

Quote from: aramis;310583Honestly, S&W Core looks far more like 77 Blue Basic or 79 red basic than it does 74 D&D.

I suspect that many of the changes you not spring from the necessity to base the thing off the OGL; they probably took the approach that if they couldn't back engineer a particular set of rules from the OGL (like the baronies rules), then they'd have to leave it out to be absolutely 100% safe, legally speaking.

Quote from: aramis;310608Whitebox: Grabbed it, skimmed it.

Handles Elves correctly, has only the core 3 (Fighter, Wizard, Cleric), still has the attack bonus problem, includes lots of options not in 0E core.

Uses 6-/15+ instead of 8-/13+.

Otherwise, my above comments apply.

Closer to 0E than any of the others I've seen. Looks like a rationalized progression on it, tho' combat is much faster progression than 0E as written, and ignoring chainmail.

The combat progression's not so much faster as smoothed; it doesn't jump a lot at a single level, but approaches it bit by bit.  So, at the level right before the original "jump" level, the S&W character is way ahead, but then the original catches up when it jumps and S&W doesn't.

It does ignore the Chainmail rules for the most part.

Quote from: Mythmere;310627The combat progression's not so much faster as smoothed; it doesn't jump a lot at a single level, but approaches it bit by bit.  So, at the level right before the original "jump" level, the S&W character is way ahead, but then the original catches up when it jumps and S&W doesn't.

It does ignore the Chainmail rules for the most part.

So basically if I'm playing S&W core, other than the stuff outlined above, I'm playing OD&D?  I think it would be a bit easier to use S&W core than the WB for the sole reason that if I end up using a module like Castle Amber, there would be a lot less to convert over.  I could pretty much use it as is, in terms of npc stats.

Quote from: Joethelawyer;310634I think it would be a bit easier to use S&W core than the WB for the sole reason that if I end up using a module like Castle Amber, there would be a lot less to convert over.  I could pretty much use it as is, in terms of npc stats.

Pretty much, yes. I'm using my AD&D Monster Manuals in my S&W Core game, and don't actually translate anything. If I need to make a last minute adjustement, I make it during game play. It's that easy, really.

the OE fighter progression is 2/3, cleric 2/4, wizard 2/5
The S&W progression is F 1/1, Cl 2/3, W 1/2
_ OED&D _S&W_
F 0.666 1.000
C 0.500 0.666
W 0.400 0.500

Monsters, however, are roughly 1/1 in both. S&W, you get better vs monsters significantly faster.
There are two breaks in OE where it's 3/3 (1.000), 3/4(.75), 3/5(0.6).

OE peaks at a +12, and for fighters, that's 16th, net +3/4, Clerics 21st for 3/5 net, and wiz 26th, for net 1/2.1

OD&D expressed as a to hit bonus instead
M 1-5_ 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26+
C 1-4_ 5-8_ _9-12 13-16 17-20 21+
F 1-3_ 4-6_ _7-9_ 10-12 13-15 16+
_ _+0_ _+2_ _+5__ _+7__ _+9__ +12

HD ≤1 1+1 2-3 3-4 4-6 6-8 9-10 11+
__ +0 +1_ +2_ +4_ +5_ +6_ _+8_ +10

I'd say it's VERY different monster relationships; monsters get better both slower, more smoothly, and better at low levels (presuming 1HD~1Level)

I personally prefer S&W White Box as my core framework, but I use the 6/13 for the stats.  I really enjoy just playing with a D20 and some D6 plus a plethora of house rules designed for the particular campaign setting.

Quote from: Joethelawyer;310634So basically if I'm playing S&W core, other than the stuff outlined above, I'm playing OD&D?

Whenever you take what you want from the rules, add whatever cool stuff from whatever source that seems most fun to you and then toss out the rest, you are playing OD&D.  

Quote from: Joethelawyer;310634So basically if I'm playing S&W core, other than the stuff outlined above, I'm playing OD&D?  I think it would be a bit easier to use S&W core than the WB for the sole reason that if I end up using a module like Castle Amber, there would be a lot less to convert over.  I could pretty much use it as is, in terms of npc stats.

You're playing one possible snapshot of the 0e rules; the amount of optional and additional material in the supplements requires choices in order to portray 0e in a linear, "modern" fashion.  True 0e presented optional material throughout - no canon is perceptible, canon doesn't exist, and it can't be extrapolated; S&W establishes a framework system and then encourages house ruling.  One can either see this in a negative light (S&W creates a false canon and then disingenuously suggests "you can house rule what you don't like"), or you can see it in the light in which it was planned (the easiest way for a modern or 1e gamer to "grasp" the 0e method is to run through a coherent and complete system as the first step, and then to perceive how mutable it is as the second step).  0e did those two steps simultaneously, which can be frustrating to learn from scratch, especially if you're expecting a more modern presentation and organization.

Quote from: Mythmere;310752One can either see this in a negative light (S&W creates a false canon and then disingenuously suggests "you can house rule what you don't like"), or you can see it in the light in which it was planned (the easiest way for a modern or 1e gamer to "grasp" the 0e method is to run through a coherent and complete system as the first step, and then to perceive how mutable it is as the second step).  0e did those two steps simultaneously, which can be frustrating to learn from scratch, especially if you're expecting a more modern presentation and organization.

Yep.  It's ironic that after 30 years of RPG development, the game that kicked it all off - OD&D - is the "expert" game, requiring flexibility, imagination, creativity, teamwork and the nous to tailor the ruleset to meet a group's ideal.