So, we have Labyrinth Lord, Basic Fantasy RPG, OSRIC, Castles & Crusades, Swords & Wizardry, Spellcraft & Swordplay, ZeFRS, and plenty of either neoclassical/retro-clone/classic cousin RPGs out there.  I've run several of them, but usually with a more experienced group.  In your experience or opinion, which would you say is easiest to introduce/teach to a gaming group to who've never had experiences with anything older than AD&D 2e?

Quote from: Zachary The First;316125So, we have Labyrinth Lord, Basic Fantasy RPG, OSRIC, Castles & Crusades, Swords & Wizardry, Spellcraft & Swordplay, ZeFRS, and plenty of either neoclassical/retro-clone/classic cousin RPGs out there.  I've run several of them, but usually with a more experienced group.  In your experience or opinion, which would you say is easiest to introduce/teach to a gaming group to who've never had experiences with anything older than AD&D 2e?

Probably Labyrinth Lord or Swords and Wizardry.  Both are pretty straightforward.  If your players are familiar with 2nd Edition, then OSRIC shouldn't be much of a problem for them.

I think the easiest to teach is C&C. However, that's if someone who is familiar with C&C is teaching it rather than some dude just picking up the books and reading it.

In that case S&W seems the easiest to read. Best put together with charts in all the right places.

Swords & Wizardry or Labyrinth Lord.  S&W if one is comfortable with a more 'free form' approach to FRPGs, LL if one needs more structure.

I honestly think that what will ultimately matter is what enthusiasm the person introducing the game to others (I guess the DM, here) feels for it, and how that person explains it to the newbies.

In other words, the person's the gateway to the game, and if the people playing around the table get a sense that the DM is enthusiastic about it, loves the game, and is good at communicating that enthusiasm and energy to them, they'll love it, no matter its actual mechanics.

My pick would also be Labyrinth Lord or Swords&Wizardry.

Tunnels and Trolls. 7.5 ed I taught to a group, including an absolute newb, in 10 min.

It's a recent revision of the 2005 revision of the 1975 Tunnels and Trolls, and it still does old school wonderfully well.

Probably Labyrinth Lord, or else BFRPG.  I'd agree that C&C is easy to teach, but is not as well or clearly written as (eg) LL, and would be much harder to learn from-the-page.

I can hardly judge by experience, as the only retro-clone/neo-retro game I've actively GMed is FtA!.
I assume it has a higher entrance barrier than LL, as it breaks with some assumptions (group combat) and codifies more stuff that would elsewhise be left to rulings (stunts). The latter part makes it easier in the long run, but it looks like we only talk about enough introduction to start to play at all.

My first pick would be LL.

A close second would be Mazes&Minotaurs - it has a somewhat more slickly designed system (which doesn't gain much over LL), but the faux-ancient faux-greek setting is a good bit harder to grasp than the bog-standard faux-medieval EDO fantasy that is well-known to almost every existing gamer.

Specifically for a 2e player I would try S&W or C&C.

Labrynth Lord, while it lacks some of the features of BECMI D&D it is a solid enough game and is less complicated than 1E AD&D and its clones. (C&C is a problem for me, I want to love it but the classes have too many special case rules that means I've got to learn rules for every class, which makes it less appealing to me.)

Isn't C&C largely derived from the d20 rules, anyway?  Not that this should knock it out of consideration, of course, but perhaps Zachary can more clearly define what kind of game his group is looking for.  Do they want the old school atmosphere, but not the 'loose' feel of the rules?   Do they want to take a spin at winging it, without hard and fast rules look ups to slow things down?

Quote from: StormBringer;316245Isn't C&C largely derived from the d20 rules, anyway?  Not that this should knock it out of consideration, of course, but perhaps Zachary can more clearly define what kind of game his group is looking for.  Do they want the old school atmosphere, but not the 'loose' feel of the rules?   Do they want to take a spin at winging it, without hard and fast rules look ups to slow things down?

Well, the hell of it is, I love running C&C.  But we have a few folks that really have come from a more rules-intensive 2e POV, which I really haven't had to deal with before.  I think the idea of basic mechanics appeals to them, but these particular parties a) don't like the SIEGE Engine, and b) get irked when they can't grok the rules right away.

I'm pretty comfy with LL and S&W (not quite as much with OSRIC), but I want to get them up and running quickly.  I just wanted opinions, perhaps anecdotes, on how people found each game to learn.  They were pretty much the same for me as far as that goes, so I'm afraid I can't be of much help.

I'm thinking of just going with the Swords & Wizardry Quick Start, which seems patent-designed for something like this.

Out of OSRIC, Swords and Wizardry and Castles and Crusades I'd say C&C, but the point about with a teacher versus learning from books is a fair one, so edge to S&W if solely out of book.  I haven't seen the others.

Quote from: Zachary The First;316125In your experience or opinion, which would you say is easiest to introduce/teach to a gaming group to who've never had experiences with anything older than AD&D 2e?

First Answer: Whatever you enjoy most.
You are the GM, put on your Viking Helmet and use your excitement and enthusiasm for your favorite to excite the players.  

Second Answer: Mazes & Minotaurs  
Beyond its utter coolness as a game, it has the bonus of being "Old School, but not D&D" which is real advantage when introducing an OSR game to people who may have had bad AD&D experiences or who get flustered with the idea of "going backward."   With M&M, they will play something very familiar, but refreshingly different.

I love to pimp this game!  
http://storygame.free.fr/MAZES.htm