Which is the most played prior edition? Which gets the most love, from the fan base?
IMO/IME it's a tie between AD&D and Basic.
Quote from: Jam The MF on September 17, 2022, 02:58:09 PM
Which is the most played prior edition? Which gets the most love, from the fan base?
Pretty sure its B/X
Yeah, based on retroclones and youtube channels, it seems to be B/X. To me this is a bit funny, because back in the 80s, it seemed that AD&D was far more popular than B/X. Usually B/X was the gateway to AD&D; at least where I lived, though most of us really played a mash-up of the two. I had one good friend who preferred BECMI so we ran a multi-year campaign of that, making it to the high companion levels with domains.
But these days, as evidenced by the wild success of OSE, it seems to be B/X that retains the dedicated fan base, largely for its simplicity and streamlined modularity.
OSE is popular because it's the clone du jour and currently in print. It's fine if you already know how the game works.
Core AD&D 2E remains my preferred rule set. There's only one clone because it's a hell of a lot more work and 2E was arranged well enough that it doesn't need one with cheap reprints available.
Quote from: Persimmon on September 17, 2022, 05:45:54 PM
Yeah, based on retroclones and youtube channels, it seems to be B/X. To me this is a bit funny, because back in the 80s, it seemed that AD&D was far more popular than B/X. Usually B/X was the gateway to AD&D; at least where I lived, though most of us really played a mash-up of the two. I had one good friend who preferred BECMI so we ran a multi-year campaign of that, making it to the high companion levels with domains.
But these days, as evidenced by the wild success of OSE, it seems to be B/X that retains the dedicated fan base, largely for its simplicity and streamlined modularity.
I was a tween when I got started, and I enjoyed B/X because it was easy to use. However, my self-important 12 year old ass always insisted that I played Advanced Dungeons & Dragons because it was ADVANCED......
Quote from: Jam The MF on September 17, 2022, 02:58:09 PM
Which is the most played prior edition? Which gets the most love, from the fan base?
3e. Cuz all the best OSR games use it's core mechanics as a base.
*ba dum tss*
Quote from: Persimmon on September 17, 2022, 05:45:54 PM
Yeah, based on retroclones and youtube channels, it seems to be B/X. To me this is a bit funny, because back in the 80s, it seemed that AD&D was far more popular than B/X. Usually B/X was the gateway to AD&D; at least where I lived, though most of us really played a mash-up of the two. I had one good friend who preferred BECMI so we ran a multi-year campaign of that, making it to the high companion levels with domains.
But these days, as evidenced by the wild success of OSE, it seems to be B/X that retains the dedicated fan base, largely for its simplicity and streamlined modularity.
Based on anecdotes from friends, B/X and BECMI were more popular overseas than AD&D, but domestically AD&D was more popular. Again this is just anecdotes from friends. Im pretty sure its true of Japan at least cause they take a lot from BECMI in some of their fantasy media.
Depends on the criteria.
Which has the most strident defenders? Probably 4th edition. There may not be many of them, but that game's fans will go to the wall for it, and do so with a vengeance. Though B/X would be a close second.
Which one gets the most praise in forums and YouTube videos? B/X by a mile.
Which one gets played the most? That kind of depends on whether you count retro-clones and derivatives. OSE is popular, but I don't get the impression that many people actually have the Moldvay Basic book open on their game table. If you're counting retro-clones only, then it's probably B/X. If you count derivatives, then it's probably 3.x, just because Pathfinder is so huge. If you mean the actual TSR/WOTC published game, then I think it's probably either 3.5 or AD&D (most of the games I've seen seem to be mashing 1st and 2nd edition together.)
Quote from: Palleon on September 17, 2022, 06:13:37 PM
OSE is popular because it's the clone du jour and currently in print. It's fine if you already know how the game works.
Core AD&D 2E remains my preferred rule set. There's only one clone because it's a hell of a lot more work and 2E was arranged well enough that it doesn't need one with cheap reprints available.
Which clone? I don't know the differences between 1st and 2nd edition well enough to spot which one a particular game is cloning.
If you count clones, B/X and its clones.
If not, probably BX and AD&D.
Quote from: ForgottenF on September 17, 2022, 07:51:39 PM
Which clone? I don't know the differences between 1st and 2nd edition well enough to spot which one a particular game is cloning.
For Gold and Glory is the 2E clone.
OSRIC is the 1E clone. Hyperboria is based on 1E but does it's own thing to mesh with the setting.
I would say Basic/Expert is the basis for a lot of the games. It's probably because it's the simplest. Authors just build out from there.
Quote from: jeff37923 on September 17, 2022, 06:57:17 PM
Quote from: Persimmon on September 17, 2022, 05:45:54 PM
Yeah, based on retroclones and youtube channels, it seems to be B/X. To me this is a bit funny, because back in the 80s, it seemed that AD&D was far more popular than B/X. Usually B/X was the gateway to AD&D; at least where I lived, though most of us really played a mash-up of the two. I had one good friend who preferred BECMI so we ran a multi-year campaign of that, making it to the high companion levels with domains.
But these days, as evidenced by the wild success of OSE, it seems to be B/X that retains the dedicated fan base, largely for its simplicity and streamlined modularity.
I was a tween when I got started, and I enjoyed B/X because it was easy to use. However, my self-important 12 year old ass always insisted that I played Advanced Dungeons & Dragons because it was ADVANCED......
The players who introduced me to the hobby back in the mid 1990s, told me right off the bat that they were playing "Advanced" Dungeons & Dragons. I didn't even know that there had been more than 1 ruleset. They were taking what they liked from AD&D, and making up the rest. It was "their" version of D&D. They should never have called it AD&D.
Quote from: Jam The MF on September 18, 2022, 01:42:33 AM
Quote from: jeff37923 on September 17, 2022, 06:57:17 PM
Quote from: Persimmon on September 17, 2022, 05:45:54 PM
Yeah, based on retroclones and youtube channels, it seems to be B/X. To me this is a bit funny, because back in the 80s, it seemed that AD&D was far more popular than B/X. Usually B/X was the gateway to AD&D; at least where I lived, though most of us really played a mash-up of the two. I had one good friend who preferred BECMI so we ran a multi-year campaign of that, making it to the high companion levels with domains.
But these days, as evidenced by the wild success of OSE, it seems to be B/X that retains the dedicated fan base, largely for its simplicity and streamlined modularity.
I was a tween when I got started, and I enjoyed B/X because it was easy to use. However, my self-important 12 year old ass always insisted that I played Advanced Dungeons & Dragons because it was ADVANCED......
The players who introduced me to the hobby back in the mid 1990s, told me right off the bat that they were playing "Advanced" Dungeons & Dragons. I didn't even know that there had been more than 1 ruleset. They were taking what they liked from AD&D, and making up the rest. It was "their" version of D&D. They should never have called it AD&D.
Everyone does that to some extent or another. Those who say they don't are lying. And if they believe they're not, they're also lying to themselves. Question is: How much did they change?
Quote from: VisionStorm on September 18, 2022, 09:01:15 AM
Quote from: Jam The MF on September 18, 2022, 01:42:33 AM
Quote from: jeff37923 on September 17, 2022, 06:57:17 PM
Quote from: Persimmon on September 17, 2022, 05:45:54 PM
Yeah, based on retroclones and youtube channels, it seems to be B/X. To me this is a bit funny, because back in the 80s, it seemed that AD&D was far more popular than B/X. Usually B/X was the gateway to AD&D; at least where I lived, though most of us really played a mash-up of the two. I had one good friend who preferred BECMI so we ran a multi-year campaign of that, making it to the high companion levels with domains.
But these days, as evidenced by the wild success of OSE, it seems to be B/X that retains the dedicated fan base, largely for its simplicity and streamlined modularity.
I was a tween when I got started, and I enjoyed B/X because it was easy to use. However, my self-important 12 year old ass always insisted that I played Advanced Dungeons & Dragons because it was ADVANCED......
The players who introduced me to the hobby back in the mid 1990s, told me right off the bat that they were playing "Advanced" Dungeons & Dragons. I didn't even know that there had been more than 1 ruleset. They were taking what they liked from AD&D, and making up the rest. It was "their" version of D&D. They should never have called it AD&D.
Everyone does that to some extent or another. Those who say they don't are lying. And if they believe they're not, they're also lying to themselves. Question is: How much did they change?
To start with; they ignored keeping up with AC, and just said that you needed a 16 or better to hit (Roll High). We were playing very high level characters, and we had a LOT of attacks per turn. 16 Attacks per turn, each. We were all some form of Fighter / Magic User, except for one really high level Cleric. We knew LOTS of spells. We didn't prepare anything, and we didn't track anything either.