Basic Fantasy Role-Playing (Freebie d20 Basic D&D clone)

[Billiam Babble]

I'm really nostalgic for my Basic D&D and Expert sets (it's unfashionable to admit it but the first ones I owned were from the revamped 1983 red box onwards  line)

Ah yes, a well written, simple selection of character classes, and handful of oddly prioritised rules, diversification and specialisms only occur at much later levels. (Sighs nostalgically.) Morale rules? Okay, strange ...

Not a Psionic Druid-Bard mixed class Half-Elf in site (okay, this is a painful flash back to a time when a player in my Basic/Expert campaign told me about the AD&D games he was playing with a friend.  Two months later -or so- I defect to the world of multiple hard back rules - man, the DMG seemed to be the fattest book in the world back then!)

Since the d20 revolution and the phenomena of OGL/SRD-sourced products, the revisionist completist in me is very drawn to "Basic Fantasy Role-Playing"

The full rulebooks are free to download here:

http://www.basicfantasy.org/downloads.html

Now, I've not played it, but I very much like the idea of playing it.

Sample look-its-old-school-d&d! character:

http://www.basicfantasy.org/sample.html


So it's based on d20 SRD but they've kept the old Saving Throw system - most curious (because Reflex Fortitude etc. seemed to make more sense).  However, no more need for the "To Hit" tables because they're using SRD Armour Class (+10) and the Attack bonus.

Quickly skimming the PDF it appears that the characters can attain 20th level, so it's really not heading past Companion Set in it's comparison with Basic D&D et al. but it looks complete nonetheless.  Lots of spells and monsters.  Not bad black and white illustrations either.  The font and layout is a homage to the 1978 sets - friendly letters, soothing on the eye...

So why use this system? (Hey, I'm not selling this, just looking for insane self-validation...)

Okay, imagine that you're running a youth club or a class or something like that and you want to introduce them to role playing (perhaps just to irritate religious parents), but you don't want your precious contemporary rulebooks or antique game boxes sullied by the ungrateful illiterate urchins... just print out the PDF.  Also you can make numerous copies and lend them out without worry if they become lost of damaged.  Of course you might have to share some dice, but hey, who amongst us does not already have too many dice? *grin*  (Cardboard spinners, anyone?)

In summary, this system is so close to Basic/Expert D&D that it might as well be Basic/Expert D&D - and if TSR/Wizards/Hasbro or whoever were still printing the old system the writers of BFRPG might just have a legal challenge.  

It's free!

(or really cheap on Lulu.com) ;)

[MortiS-the-Lost]

Looks useful, I feel I should pick one of these retro-systems up and run a few games, but I don’t know which one! (Then again I still have my Red and Blue books and my AD&D books … and AD&D 2nd)
There seem to be a lot of retro-D&D rules springing up all over the place these days, probably as a back-lash against D&D 4th by older player. Maybe we’ll be seeing some retro-WFRP systems in the near future in response to what FF claim is WFRP3!

[Billiam Babble]

It's strange.  I'm not sure what's behind most of these publications, apart from open licensing and nostalgia - certainly not profit.  But surely people don't play whole campaigns with a free system when they have lavish modern (or old) rulebooks on their shelves?  I downloaded a Runquest SRD a while back.

I'm still amazed by the power of the internet to resurrect past loves - DOS abandon-ware, rpgs, children's TV, chocolate bars!

I've been reading the BFRG rules a bit more closely - again, they have a simplicity and "completeness", and when rules are not present I believe it would acceptable to use the D&D red and blue books as a source, and after that the AD&D books.  Incidentally, despite my dismissing of druids and bards there's a few bonus class based supplements (which seem to be inspired by AD&D and AD&D 2nd).

Also, one difference that I am found in the BFRPG of is that you can be a Halfling Thief!  Class and race are separate in BFRG like in AD&D with some limits upon which class they can be.  There's also a vague example "combination class" of fighter/magic-user available to the Elf which ties in neatly with Basic D&D.  I think one of the differences between "Original" D&D and the Basic/Expert sets was that races were separate from class, and much scorn is still held amongst OD&Ders for the Basic system.
-I've never even seen a white box OD&D set (I've seen photos, but you know what I mean, and I have never met anyone in the UK with rules which precede the 1978 "Holmes" edition)  But I'm digressing into D&D collector mythos.  Suffice to say, there are forums where fans of truly ancient rules still argue the validity of loyalty different boxes and bindings.  These are strange times!  Oddly reassuring, though.

In my head I try to merge the solo mechanics of WH-Quest with Basic D&D... it's an ongoing obsession.

Just for Mortis - who has been recently betrayed by those whores at Fantasy Flight games - "O"WFRP, anyone?

[Solomoriah]

Always late to the party...

I'm the author of Basic Fantasy RPG (well, the primary author, anyway), and I'll try to answer a question or two:

Billiam Babble wrote

It's strange.  I'm not sure what's behind most of these publications, apart from open licensing and nostalgia - certainly not profit.  But surely people don't play whole campaigns with a free system when they have lavish modern (or old) rulebooks on their shelves?

Certainly not profit, for me, but several of the retro-clone systems are supported by commercial offerings.  I'm not a believer in that... games are a hobby, not a job... I don't profit from my hobbies in any monetary sense, and I don't plan to.

But... "lavish" rulebooks don't suit me.  "Lavish" rules (as in, lots of them) don't suit me at all.  Sure, there are a bunch of supplements on the Basic Fantasy website, but that's all they are... supplements.  I use almost none of that, except the extra monsters.  "Modern" rules don't suit me all that well either.

Basic Fantasy RPG is a labor of love (else, it would never have been finished).  All that really mattered to me was that I like it...  the fact that many others do also is just gravy.  I've sold over 300 copies of the rulebook (at cost) and have had something more than 20,000 downloads of those rules in PDF from the website; of course, not nearly everyone who downloaded the game runs it, and I know a few copies of the rulebook in print were resold, but still, there are others using my game system.  This makes me happy.

Light, fast, simple.

For the record, I have a full set of 1st Edition AD&D books, a tattered set of the 1981 Basic and Expert rules (which is where I started, and what I found I preferred before I wrote my own system), a few 2nd Edition AD&D books, and a mess of other non-D&D game materials stashed in the attic.  The games I run now consist of Basic Fantasy RPG, Project 74 (an older free system of mine), and Marvel Super Heroes.  Previously, I ran an extended "pulp sci-fi" campaign using a system I wrote.

Billiam Babble wrote

Also, one difference that I am found in the BFRPG of is that you can be a Halfling Thief!  Class and race are separate in BFRG like in AD&D with some limits upon which class they can be.  There's also a vague example "combination class" of fighter/magic-user available to the Elf which ties in neatly with Basic D&D.

"Vague?"  What's vague about it?

[Billiam Babble]

Hi Solomariah!

Thanks for posting!

If I'd have known the game's author would have been reading this I think I would have been a little more careful in my generalisations! *grin*
 
Rereading the post, I think I should have typed "brief" as opposed to "vague".  It is my understanding of mixed classes which is vague, not the description.
AD&D (1st ed) lost me around the appendices, Bards, Multi-class and Psionics, some sort of prejudice seems to kick in, so my brain naturally blocks out the very notion of dividing up experience points between different class levels for one character.  I don't have my printed copy of the BFRPG to hand but I think I would have needed more explicit examples (I used to be a Red Box D&Der - I'm used to everything being spelled out), but the work as a whole certainly does not suffer for the lack of it. My intention was to highlight the fact that you had a different approach to races and class to the 80's boxed D&D systems, but it seems to have come out as a criticism - my apologies and formal retractions.

I was so pleased to discover these types of rules in a modern context with an on-line following and so many supplements that I bought a copy for myself and one for a friend.  This allowed to me check out both types of softcover binding on Lulu.  As a gift, the normal spine binding was perfect, and for myself the spiral binding was great for thumbing through and not having to worry about broken spines or bent pages.  My friend was especially intrigued because he'd just moved house and all of his old games were still in his parents' loft.

I believe fans would forgive you if you ever planned to put the price up by a few cents on the hard copies just to keep you in stationery and web space rental.  After all, a professionally printed copy is a sort of well bound artefact.  However, I can see that an ensemble effort as with the art could cause complex royalty problems.

Congratulations upon such a successful project!  
I believe that you are being way too modest ... especially since you're bringing a lot of  fun for many people via accessible role playing, and with it a huge nostalgia kick for guys like me.

(Okay I'll stop being such a sycophant now ...)


Quick query (you probably get asked this quite a bit)  at which party level would you believe that BFRP provides the best playing experience in terms of overall gaming satisfaction?  

[Solomoriah]

Billiam Babble wrote

Rereading the post, I think I should have typed "brief" as opposed to "vague".  It is my understanding of mixed classes which is vague, not the description.
AD&D (1st ed) lost me around the appendices, Bards, Multi-class and Psionics, some sort of prejudice seems to kick in, so my brain naturally blocks out the very notion of dividing up experience points between different class levels for one character.

Which is why Basic Fantasy RPG doesn't do it that way. Instead, XP required is added together for the two classes.

Billiam Babble wrote

I don't have my printed copy of the BFRPG to hand but I think I would have needed more explicit examples (I used to be a Red Box D&Der - I'm used to everything being spelled out), but the work as a whole certainly does not suffer for the lack of it. My intention was to highlight the fact that you had a different approach to races and class to the 80's boxed D&D systems, but it seems to have come out as a criticism - my apologies and formal retractions.

S'awright.

Billiam Babble wrote

I was so pleased to discover these types of rules in a modern context with an on-line following and so many supplements that I bought a copy for myself and one for a friend.  This allowed to me check out both types of softcover binding on Lulu.  As a gift, the normal spine binding was perfect, and for myself the spiral binding was great for thumbing through and not having to worry about broken spines or bent pages.  My friend was especially intrigued because he'd just moved house and all of his old games were still in his parents' loft.

I'm glad you like it.  I have a coilbound copy of 1st Edition and a hardback of each of 1st and 2nd edition.  I like the hardback better, but between the coilbound and the perfect bound I'd choose the coily every time.

Billiam Babble wrote

I believe fans would forgive you if you ever planned to put the price up by a few cents on the hard copies just to keep you in stationery and web space rental.  After all, a professionally printed copy is a sort of well bound artefact.  However, I can see that an ensemble effort as with the art could cause complex royalty problems.

I have permission from those who contributed to make a small amount per book... I just haven't needed to.  My business operates the website (I'm the owner, to be clear) as part of a multi-site account, so the cost is effectively nil.  I pay about ten bucks a year for the domain name, and that's it.

Billiam Babble wrote

Congratulations upon such a successful project!  
I believe that you are being way too modest ... especially since you're bringing a lot of  fun for many people via accessible role playing, and with it a huge nostalgia kick for guys like me.

Thanks.  Tell me, are you a member of either the Dragonsfoot or Basic Fantasy forums?  We always like to see fans of the game on the forums.

Billiam Babble wrote

Quick query (you probably get asked this quite a bit)  at which party level would you believe that BFRP provides the best playing experience in terms of overall gaming satisfaction?

Can't answer that.  Honestly don't know... most of my experience with the game is at low levels, and it works fine there.

[MortiS-the-Lost]

Awesome! I had no idea we had a real RPG author lurking in our little corner of the web!

Welcome aboard  how are you finding the site so far?

[Solomoriah]

S'awright.  Don't have a lot of time to check it out, honestly; I should be working on the Flying Island for QuinCon 25 next week...