Figured it'd be nice to have a thread about this game. Has great support from an active and friendly community- best of all, it's all free:)
For those folks who prefer their game in print, you can get the following off Amazon:
Basic Fantasy RPG- $3.95 160 pages- all in one book.
Morgansfoot: Western Lands Campaign- $2.83 72 page module.
Fortress, Tomb, and Tower: The Glain Campaign $2.49 62 page module.
The Chaotic Caves $2.44 44 page module.
Monkey Isle- $2.79 54 page module.
Adventure Anthology 1 -$3.75 86 page mini module collection (13 small adventures)
That comes out to a total of $18.25 for a long time of gaming fun. Again, it's all free if you don't mind pdf's.
I've contributed to the game, just small pictures here and there. I'm impressed with what they've accomplished.
I ran a bit of a campaign using Basic Fantasy after finishing a 3.5 campaign. Everyone had a blast. That was the point of no return to complex rules for me. This is why I'm very happy with 5E.
I've been in a BFRPG game for a while now-- and I also helped redo their druid supplement and contributed a few monsters to a new release of the Field Guide. Good system, bloody great community.
I'll check out the modules, thanks for the recommendation.
I'm pretty sure danbuter is a fan and/or wrote a fan supplement.
Wow, that sounds like a great bargain. Should check it out.
It's the system for our next campaign.
Yeah, BF is a good little game - it was my go-to game until ACKS came along. It is still good value though; that stack for less than $20 on Amazon is a bargain. And as you say, it's free if you don't mind PDF's.
Basic Fantasy is great and my preferred version for B/X D&D.
I haven't gotten into BF. What makes it interesting compared to Swords & Wizardry?
Quote from: Spinachcat;779080I haven't gotten into BF. What makes it interesting compared to Swords & Wizardry?
S&W is based on OD&D. Basic Fantasy is based on B/XD&D (with race and class split and Ascending AC).
Any other bits of interest?
S&W has Ascending AC too.
Quote from: Spinachcat;779100Any other bits of interest?
S&W has Ascending AC too.
Not really. They are both strongly based on their roots. Which one you prefer will be based on which base game is preferred.
We'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!
Bastards. Now I'm thinking about pulling some of my favorite 5e bits into Basic Fantasy ...
Sounds like a good deal if one digs fantasy games. Are the modules compatible with D&D Basic/Expert/etc.? If one already owns Basic/Expert/etc. is there a reason to get Basic Fantasy?
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).
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I placed an order for the full print line yesterday - looking forward to Sat delivery. $20 with shipping, thanks to Amazon Prime.
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.
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...
Okay, I'll bite: what is "ascending AC"?
I assume AC = Armor Class.
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.
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.
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.
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.
THAC0 gives you a number to hit AC 0. For example, 18. To work out what you need to roll to hit an particular AC you work out the difference between that AC and 0 and reduce or increase the number accordingly (though in a numerically reverse relationship: if AC is greater than 0, you reduce the number to hit).
With Ascending AC, the PC has +2 to hit, which you add to the d20 roll. The result needs to equal or beat the AC.
It's the same math, but I find the later easier to understand YMMV
FWIW Basic Fantasy is free to download. So you can check it out yourself at no cost.
Quote from: Matt;779766No THAC0? And they still call it D&D? What!
THAC0 is deeply ingrained in my brain.
OD&D, Basic D&D, B/X D&D, BECMI D&D and most of AD&D1e doesn't use THAC0 either. But I think they qualify as D&D :)
The game is awesome! I'll plug my supplement, Sword & Board as well: http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=88225.
The pdf is free, and you can get a print copy for $3.17 (the at-cost price).
To me, it's a slightly-updated version of B/X D&D. Easily my favorite version of the game.
Thanks for the info.
I know we used THAC0 with 1st ed. Seems we used it with Basic as well. Never played OD&D.
I love how much free stuff there is nowadays. Such a diverse array of material, so much of it free. Great times for RPGs. Just wish I could find more folks interested in games other than elves-with-magic-swords fantasy.
Oh my...I just realized that the string of great luck I thought I was having in a couple of Labyrinth Lord pick-up games was in fact the result of my using regular old AC and everyone else using ascending AC. So when we were
calling out what AC we hit, nobody was hitting my AC 4 elf...man, I wonder what the results would have been had I realized I was much easier to hit.
Quote from: Matt;779782I know we used THAC0 with 1st ed. Seems we used it with Basic as well. Never played OD&D.
THAC0 was a shorthand in the DMG but it wasn't accurate when used exclusively due to the multiple 20 in the 1e attack tables. Players weren't even meant to see their THAC0 in 1e, as it was all meant to be back ended by the DM.
THAC0 was only used in modules expressly and the like around 1983 or 1984 with the Dragonlance modules IIRC.
Quote from: Matt;779767Which 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.
Well, you don't need a chart for THAC0 (I was weaned on 2E, as well), but if you use ascending AC, you basically eliminate a step.
Quote from: Matt;779767Sounds 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.
Something that makes the transition easier is that in older editions things tend to start at AC10 and go down from there, and in newer editions things tend to start at AC10 and go up from there.
So the two scales don't usually (there are a couple of exceptions around the 8-12 mark, but they're very rare) use the same numbers. You don't have to get used to AC10 being better than AC0. You have to get used to AC18 being better than AC13. Since they're not AC numbers you're used to seeing, it's easier to get used to.
I've been reading BFRPG and like it a lot. Good, solid, simple implementation of the core ideas of a D&D like game. Find myself wanting to use it as the base, then mix in a few things here and there from ACKS, and some other OSR games.
Looking forward to playing more of this game in the future!
Quote from: Herne's Son;780387Looking forward to playing more of this game in the future!
A new edition is being worked on to clean it up. It's worth noting Basic Fantasy was one of the first three OSR RPGs, along with OSRIC and Castles & Crusades.
Quote from: Herne's Son;780387I've been reading BFRPG and like it a lot. Good, solid, simple implementation of the core ideas of a D&D like game. Find myself wanting to use it as the base, then mix in a few things here and there from ACKS, and some other OSR games.
Looking forward to playing more of this game in the future!
I'm running a game of it this afternoon. I blame this thread, in specific.
Fuckers. :D
Quote from: Molotov;780434I'm running a game of it this afternoon. I blame this thread, in specific.
Fuckers. :D
We start next Saturday...douche bags. :)
Quote from: Skywalker;780397A new edition is being worked on to clean it up. It's worth noting Basic Fantasy was one of the first three OSR RPGs, along with OSRIC and Castles & Crusades.
Out of curiosity: why is that worth noting?
Quote from: Herne's Son;780387I've been reading BFRPG and like it a lot. Good, solid, simple implementation of the core ideas of a D&D like game. Find myself wanting to use it as the base, then mix in a few things here and there from ACKS, and some other OSR games.
Looking forward to playing more of this game in the future!
You, sir, are a man after me own heart.
Quote from: Matt;779787Oh my...I just realized that the string of great luck I thought I was having in a couple of Labyrinth Lord pick-up games was in fact the result of my using regular old AC and everyone else using ascending AC. So when we were
calling out what AC we hit, nobody was hitting my AC 4 elf...man, I wonder what the results would have been had I realized I was much easier to hit.
LL does not use ascending AC. Is that a house rule you guys are using?
Quote from: Matt;780469Out of curiosity: why is that worth noting?
The comment I was responding to was that it will be great to see what the RPG does next in the future. I was just adding to that by noting its past, that it already has quite a history and has been well regarded throughout.
Ran a few hours of Basic Fantasy rpg adventure yesterday, and had a blast. Two PCs .. nearly had 3 TPKs (2 from wandering monsters).
Both players - experienced hands - commented something to the effect of "Did we just make characters, start and finish a first adventure in one sitting? Wow ..."
Turns out I really dig the way BFRPG handles Ability Checks (basically, similar manner to a Saving Throw, although with it's own table. Target # to meet or beat, ST style - all classes use the same listing, by level).
Both players signed up for a monthly game.
Quote from: Molotov;780730Ran a few hours of Basic Fantasy rpg adventure yesterday, and had a blast. Two PCs .. nearly had 3 TPKs (2 from wandering monsters).
Both players - experienced hands - commented something to the effect of "Did we just make characters, start and finish a first adventure in one sitting? Wow ..."
Turns out I really dig the way BFRPG handles Ability Checks (basically, similar manner to a Saving Throw, although with it's own table. Target # to meet or beat, ST style - all classes use the same listing, by level).
Both players signed up for a monthly game.
Dude, that awesome:)
Quote from: Molotov;780434I'm running a game of it this afternoon. I blame this thread, in specific.
Fuckers. :D
My work is done. :p
Nice.
Quote from: Skywalker;780397A new edition is being worked on to clean it up. It's worth noting Basic Fantasy was one of the first three OSR RPGs, along with OSRIC and Castles & Crusades.
Just popping in to note that the 3rd edition and the new monster book are now available through lulu and Amazon. I've got copies of both on the way, and look forward to playing it again soon!
I've been eyeing that Pelinore project that Kellri has resurrected from the old Imagine Magazine articles. Looks like they might be a great combination.
Its also available on DTRPG for the first time.
I received a copy of the Field Guide the other day and just put in the order for the 3rd rules:)
Our current campaign is BFRPG. I might never switch.:-)
Its one I never gave much attention to.
Quote from: RPGPundit;803085Its one I never gave much attention to.
I must admit I find that rather surprising. Seeing as how you did your own OSR game, I figured you'd have checked it out. It was one of the earliest of the now-bloated crowd of retroclone-type games.
Quote from: Herne's Son;803456I must admit I find that rather surprising. Seeing as how you did your own OSR game, I figured you'd have checked it out. It was one of the earliest of the now-bloated crowd of retroclone-type games.
Count me as surprised, as well. Maybe the inverted AC made it too "new school" for Pundit.:-)
Quote from: cranebump;802564Our current campaign is BFRPG. I might never switch.:-)
I've been running with it for three years nopw. The game started as a one shot for someone who had never played a TTRPG. And I hadn't GMed anything for 20 years and had no books anymore and needed some rules to hang off of...
By coincidence I had been working on a sandbox, without any rules to refer to, for the previous year. Just because it felt like something I wanted to do. So I had some maps, some cultures, some NPCs and some politics in place
When I found BFRPG I liked the ascending AC, lack of alignment, separation of race and class and community/supplement support. I immediately saw how it was easy to mod, without a lot of tears. It certainly helped me get my game running with not a lot of time investment.
I found it's a good system for both new players and refugees from crunchier editions. I'm pleased that one of my 3.0 era players has since started up his own home game, using BFRPG for his base. That's very cool.
I just ordered all the new stuff to read over xmas break.
Thanks, guys! Glad to see you're enjoying the game. Just a note about RPGNow... I have the Field Guide almost ready to activate there, and I plan to bring out the other Basic Fantasy adventure material on that site early next year. RPGNow product activation is maddeningly slow...
I want a digest sized hard cover copy to match all the similarly sized digest OSR goodness lately.
Of course, since it's open sourced, I suppose I could just do that.
Quote from: Molotov;803864I want a digest sized hard cover copy to match all the similarly sized digest OSR goodness lately.
Of course, since it's open sourced, I suppose I could just do that.
Wouldn't be hard at all. Grab the ODT doc off the website, just set the page size to 6"x9", and then reformat where needed. The only tricky bits would be some of the larger tables, but that's possible. Might just need to tilt them to be vertically-oriented, rather than horizontally-oriented.
Quote from: Solomoriah;803676Thanks, guys! Glad to see you're enjoying the game. Just a note about RPGNow... I have the Field Guide almost ready to activate there, and I plan to bring out the other Basic Fantasy adventure material on that site early next year. RPGNow product activation is maddeningly slow...
Yeah and god help you if you make a mistake and have to do the proof copy cycle over again.
There is some discussion of creating a digest sized version on the Basic Fantasy forums right now.
Strictly speaking, you can't legally produce a book that calls itself "Basic Fantasy RPG" or some derivative thereof, containing our rules; the only thing I reserve as Product Identity in the rules is the name, my eye, and the Scribbled Dragon. Well, you can't do it legally without my permission, anyway, and the only way I'd agree to it is if it were done as part of the Basic Fantasy Project.
Which leads me back around to our forum, actually.
:D
Quote from: Solomoriah;803924There is some discussion of creating a digest sized version on the Basic Fantasy forums right now.
Strictly speaking, you can't legally produce a book that calls itself "Basic Fantasy RPG" or some derivative thereof, containing our rules; the only thing I reserve as Product Identity in the rules is the name, my eye, and the Scribbled Dragon. Well, you can't do it legally without my permission, anyway, and the only way I'd agree to it is if it were done as part of the Basic Fantasy Project.
Which leads me back around to our forum, actually.
:D
No, I'd need to call it something else, remove those particular portions of trade dress / IP, and then I'd likely be in the clear. But, I was really thinking of just having a personal one for my use in any event - not looking to go commercial on BFRPG. ;) And back to that forum then ...
Quote from: Molotov;803931No, I'd need to call it something else, remove those particular portions of trade dress / IP, and then I'd likely be in the clear. But, I was really thinking of just having a personal one for my use in any event - not looking to go commercial on BFRPG. ;) And back to that forum then ...
That's what I was thinking of, too. Just doing a quick reformat for personal use. I'm becoming a big fan of digest-sized RPGs these days.