Alrighty, I'm gonna go for the 4e manual.
I'm gonna guess that you can only buy it, and there isn't an online version.
Also, Werdna, are you called Andrew in meatspace?
Werdna is the villain in the old Wizardry games (maybe just the first one?) and yes the Wizardry author's name was Andrew. The other author also had an NPC in the game with a reversed name.
---
TL;DR: What I would recommend is for you to download Labyrinth Lord and OSRIC, which are good retro-clones of B/X and 1e respectively. That's a free option and gives you an idea if this thing is gonna fly. If those are too dense, try Microlite20 (stripped-down 3e) or Microlite74 (a gaming style more similar to 0e though the actual rules are on the 3e chassis).
---
As for which edition you'd like, I'll reiterate that they're different enough that you could like any of them, and you could have opposite opinions from anyone about one of them. Further, if the DM is willing to houserule and make snap rulings (both of which I personally think are necessary), you can play any edition in any way. But there are a couple reasons I can think of to play a game that encourages the kind of gameplay you want.
A: New players coming in will hear "we're playing 1st edition" and will have certain expectations. If you think you're showing up for a game of Settlers of Catan and everyone's wearing hockey masks you might be perturbed. So if I walk into a game on the first night and it's supposed to be 1st edition but everyone's got power cards and six-page character sheets without any equipment lists, I'm gonna feel like there was a bait-and-switch.
B: The rules help support the DM so he doesn't have to do so much heavy lifting. Again, imagine you're trying to play a WW2 wargame but all you have in front of you is the rules to checkers. With rules for the game you want to play, you won't have to make up so much stuff. You need tools for between-sessions creative stuff and tools to be used at the table.
I'd characterize the editions as follows:
0e: AKA "the little brown books". Three booklets plus a fourth called Chainmail which is a mass-combat game. There are a lot of gaps, but the basic chassis is a nicely stripped-down starting point for a DM who wants to make up new monsters, spells, etc. and create a really memorable and unique game. The Supplement booklets give insight into how Gygax would have you expand your game.
B/X: The initial part of a Basic version of D&D (levels 1-3) ended up expanding into an Expert (4-14), Companion, Master, and Immortal sets (max. level 36). The B/X set is just the Basic set with the Expert expansion. These two sets give you most of the rules you'll need for dungeon and wilderness adventure.
(Make sure you understand WHICH Basic set you're getting. There's two old-school lines and a new one for 4th edition)
RC: The Rules Cyclopedia compiled all the rules from the B/E/C/M/I sets into one book. Like Pathfinder, you can play using just this book. Includes rules for mass warfare, domain management, plane travel, etc. Optional modules within can be used, or not, depending on whether you want the complexity, and without harming the rest of the rules.
1e: First edition is kind of a refined 0e with all the supplements added. It's a hot sexy mess and the DMG in particular has a LOT of tools for the DM, primarily focused on adventure in the dungeon, wilderness, and city (although offerings by the player community are a lot better in that regard, the book gives a solid framework). No expansions, just more books of monsters and stuff for the DM.
2e: Second edition was meant to refine and clean up 1e. Then they added splatbooks that gave more detail and power for each race and class. You can play without them though, and it's a fine game. The 2e DMG DM advice is a lot more touchy-feely than the 1e DMG, so you might want to read both to get two perspectives. In general, the 2e DMG is less useful as a game aid. I would say that out of everything here, 2e is the least interesting because it didn't push any boundaries or really change much. On the other hand, it's almost 100% compatible with 1e supplements which means you have a huge library of available material you can play with.
2.5e: The Player's Option series is a revision of 2e without splatbooks - or you could look at it as incorporation of the splatbooks into the core rules and set blender to Chop. Character "builds" are important for the first time but you only worry about 1st level - after that you don't choose new powerful abilities and you don't need to worry about what order you pick stuff in as in 3e.
3e: Third edition features very open multi-classing rules (as opposed to earlier rules which prevented PCs of certain races from becoming certain classes, or restricted a class or race due to ability scores. For example, before, a Dwarf couldn't be a Wizard, and if his Strength were too low he couldn't be a Fighter, and in any case his level would be limited). In 3e you also choose abilities as you gain levels, and some abilities require that you have other prerequisites, so you need to plan out your character's progress if you wanted to get cool stuff. If you didn't care about cool stuff, you didn't need to worry about your "build". 3e also worked hard to make DMing easier by giving plenty of guidelines, and gave some good tools in the core rules for making your campaign. There are also splatbooks which expand the game along the same lines (more stuff to plan out, more DM guidelines, a few new tools).
3.5e: They screwed some shit up with 3e and they re-released a lot of books with minor editing to fix a few of the most glaring problems.
4e: I've never played it.
---
There are other D&D type games out there.
There are retro-clones of all the early editions of D&D. Some versions of D&D get a treatment from multiple designers so you see how several people would have done it better. These are typically "fantasy heartbreakers" which the writer makes to fulfill a desire to see their favorite game done right. I'd say there's a good dozen worth trying.
ACKS: Adventurer-Conquerer-King is interesting primarily for its take on the "endgame" which is settling down and running a scrap of countryside, or a globe-spanning spy network, or a remote temple, or whatever.
Pathfinder: This is 3.5e rewritten by people who care. If you like 3e you probably like the direction Pathfinder went.
See here for a list of other retro-clones. Note that I've never really heard anything about the ones under "Other Games" but I'd encourage you to check them out if your thirst remains unslaked.
OSR blogs tend to be hit or miss on a post-to-post basis, but some are consistently excellent. I just got The Dungeon Alphabet and Vornheim for xmas and they're very good examples of creative product from the community, usable with any of the above games and more.
And finally, these are just my opinions. I've tried to be neutral but my preferences will bleed through. I grew up on a blend of 1e/2e, tried 3e and thought its heart was in the right place but the implementation was disastrous, dabbled in other stuff.
My game preferences run toward
old school sandbox campaigns. I like to see players decide what to do and the plot is the story of what they end up doing, rather than the DM creating a plot and the players have to do that thing (that is, not a railroad).
Author
Topic: "DnD Next": Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition. Starter set is out! (Read 58393 times)