Questions on FFC Printings & Blackmoor

[jasmith]

Howdy everybody!

I had a few question, which I thought I might present to the Blackmoor experts, here.

This week, I obtained one of my RPG Grail items: A copy of The First Fantasy Campaign!

It's a 3rd printing, in beautiful condition! Which brings up my first question. Given the large page-count differences between the 2nd and 3rd printings, is there much material missing? Or, was it just tighter presentation? Was anything important cut?

If I were going to run a Blackmoor campaign, what other material would you highly recommend procuring? I'd be running OD&D, or maybe AD&D, but stuff from later editions is fine by me, so long as it has quality setting material.

Thanks bunches!

[Havard]

James!
Welcome to the Comeback Inn!

I will have to check this again, but IIRC, you arent missing too much. The font has been changed, things have been tidied up a bit. The biggest draw for having the 1st print is that you get Arneson's original drawings instead of the replacement art. Not that Arneson was a master illustrator, but the replacement art wasnt that much better, so having the original drawings give us more of an authentic feel.

If I were going to run a Blackmoor campaign, what other material would you highly recommend procuring? I'd be running OD&D, or maybe AD&D, but stuff from later editions is fine by me, so long as it has quality setting material.

It depends on whether you are looking for rules bits or more of an overview of the setting. For rules contents, the DA modules are easy to use with OD&D or AD&D. DA1 is a good starting point.

If you arent allergic to 3E material, I do recommend the Dave Arneson's Blackmoor Campaign Guide, preferably the softcover, but the hardback also works. Since you are using TSR era rules, many of the rules bits of the book wont be very useful to you, but I still think the book makes for a great introduction to the setting, greatly complementing what is found in the FFC.

I am curious to see what you think of the FFC and if you are thinking about starting a campaign of your own, do tell us about it!



-Havard

[aldarron]

..., is there much material missing? Or, was it just tighter presentation? Was anything important cut?

Hi James - There's only a couple little things here and there. What happened was the whole thing was retyped and reformatted. There's no blocks of text deliberately ommited. The word "chops" is missing from the magic swords section and a some things that were previously abbreviated are spelled out, and oddly, vise versa. Unless you are doing the kinda detailed text digging that some of us engage in, you won't miss a thing.

If I were going to run a Blackmoor campaign, what other material would you highly recommend procuring? I'd be running OD&D, or maybe AD&D, but stuff from later editions is fine by me, so long as it has quality setting material.

Thanks bunches!

Not trying to be a pitch artist, but the Dragons at Dawn pdf would be a very usefull addition to a D&D Blackmoor campaign, both for some of the clarity it brings to Arneson's material and for the details of blackmoor spells, swords, magic and magic items, play style and character clases that can easily be adapted.

and of course, what Havard said.

[DungeonDevil]

I second D@D as a way to flesh out an understanding of what's in the FFC. Any perspectives which can illuminate the sometimes confusing material in the FFC are always a boon to an OS/Blackmoor-esque campaign.

May I ask where the word "chop" was in the text?

Another oddity is the phrase "double 1" which makes no sense, but was probably originally "dbl" (=double) from what I've heard.

[aldarron]

May I ask where the word "chop" was in the text?

1980 Pg 44

"Number Double Values* (Std=0. M=6, Sm= 12)"

The atserisk refered to "that is, get 2 chops per melee round"

which is left out of the 1980 section.

Another oddity is the phrase "double 1" which makes no sense, but was probably originally "dbl" (=double) from what I've heard.

yeah that one here http://odd74.proboards.com/index.cgi?bo ... hread=5692

Thanks for the second, DD

[finarvyn]

If I were going to run a Blackmoor campaign, what other material would you highly recommend procuring? I'd be running OD&D, or maybe AD&D, but stuff from later editions is fine by me, so long as it has quality setting material.

It depends on whether you are looking for rules bits or more of an overview of the setting. For rules contents, the DA modules are easy to use with OD&D or AD&D. DA1 is a good starting point.

If you arent allergic to 3E material, I do recommend the Dave Arneson's Blackmoor Campaign Guide, preferably the softcover, but the hardback also works. Since you are using TSR era rules, many of the rules bits of the book wont be very useful to you, but I still think the book makes for a great introduction to the setting, greatly complementing what is found in the FFC.

I'm an early edition "snob" and like to put my Blackmoor in a FFC-based rules set, with TotF from Blackmoor Supplement II and Dragons at Dawn.

Havard is more "into" the newer material than I. If I add more stuff it's mostly the Judges Guild Wilderlands material since it kind of works with the FFC. (Dave adjusted his maps and such to fit with the Wilderlands.)

Robert Conley has put out some Blackmoor-like material as well. What I've seen is pretty good stuff.

Personally, I put less faith in the DA series modules, even less in the 3E products, much less in the 4E book. I own them all, you understand, but like my Blackmoor more "pure" than some of the others here. :lol:

I'd say start with the FFC and see what happens. If you want to expand there is a wealth of Blackmoor goodness out there! 8)

[finarvyn]

Personally, I put less faith in the DA series modules, even less in the 3E products, much less in the 4E book.

I thought I should explain this a little. The upside of the later products is that they expand the setting a lot. I mean, the total amound of new background material in the DA modules, the 3E books, and so on, is amazing.

It's also a lot for me to remember. I like to think about Blackmoor as a campaign from a simpler era, not one where I have to keep track of a zillion details. That's one thing that bothered me about later editions of D&D, and I have this same problem with monster stat blocks and so on. Keep 'em simple and I'm happy.

Also, I find some of the new material disturbing. For example, I know that there weren't prestige classes in 1971. This stuff was added later to fit the 3E rules system. They didn't have "at will" powers, etc, until 4th edition. I should be able to look past that part and focus on the background material, but I just can't.

As Havard put it, apparently I'm "allergic to 3E material".

[DungeonDevil]

I'm an early edition "snob" and like to put my Blackmoor in a FFC-based rules set, with TotF from Blackmoor Supplement II and Dragons at Dawn.

BAM!
Nail. Right. On. The. Head.

8)

I'm glad I'm not the only one.

[Havard]

Personally, I put less faith in the DA series modules, even less in the 3E products, much less in the 4E book.

I thought I should explain this a little. The upside of the later products is that they expand the setting a lot. I mean, the total amound of new background material in the DA modules, the 3E books, and so on, is amazing.

It's also a lot for me to remember. I like to think about Blackmoor as a campaign from a simpler era, not one where I have to keep track of a zillion details.

Thing is, back in the days people were also keeping track of a zillion details. It was just that in many cases they saw no need to write them down as they assumed they would be obvious to anyone reading them. Unfortunately, to those arriving to the hobby a decade later, lacking for instance the war gaming background, material written in the 70s was sometimes confusing.

That's one thing that bothered me about later editions of D&D, and I have this same problem with monster stat blocks and so on. Keep 'em simple and I'm happy.

Here is a place where we don't disagree. When it comes to rules bits I also don't see much need for too much of it.

However, I do like the setting material to be fleshed out. I do like timelines (alot), general overview of kingdoms, racial descriptions and such. The FFC says the Peshwah have X number of horsemen and Y number of Dragons. I am glad that I have another book which actually tells me who the Peshwah are.

Also, I find some of the new material disturbing. For example, I know that there weren't prestige classes in 1971. This stuff was added later to fit the 3E rules system. They didn't have "at will" powers, etc, until 4th edition. I should be able to look past that part and focus on the background material, but I just can't.

Prestige classes may not have been part of the system, but what prestige classes really are is a formalization of character tropes. While the formalization may be new and perhaps not even neccessary, certain tropes have always existed. Whether all the actual PrCs in the D20 Blackmoor line did exist as tropes previously is another matter.

As Havard put it, apparently I'm "allergic to 3E material".

If you have an allergy it is much milder than the people I normally talk to. For some reason, I am never bothered by reading books where I need to ignore part of the contents. It is possible that this has to do with the fact that I have played so many different systems/settings, and have often used the setting from game A with the rules from game B. This is a pretty interesting exercise, because it forces you to really think through which parts are rules and which are setting.


-Havard

[finarvyn]

I'm an early edition "snob" and like to put my Blackmoor in a FFC-based rules set, with TotF from Blackmoor Supplement II and Dragons at Dawn.

BAM!
Nail. Right. On. The. Head.

8)

I'm glad I'm not the only one.

I'm glad that I'm not the only one, either. Again, I have no desire to dump on the later material. I just love the early stuff better. Something about reading the FFC and thinking "wow; I could have done this" instead of having a slick color product that looks like a game company did it. I have the same love for the old OD&D books and early Judges Guild material. It just feels "right" somehow.