Basic Fantasy seemed close to this as well, but more of a melding of the "Basic" and "Advanced" ideas.
At the end of the day though a product that is compatible for one game should work with another.
In a couple of recent posts from Billy Goes to Mordor (love that blog name) suggests that there is still some form of system adherence in the OSR crowd.
http://billygoes.blogspot.co.il/2013/08/by-numbers-relative-popularity-of-dnd.html
http://billygoes.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-relative-popularity-of-various.html
His numbers, based on his survey came out like this:
- DCC RPG 32%
- Labyrinth Lord 31%
- Swords and Wizardry 28%
- LotFP 24%
- ACKS 10%
- OSRIC 8%
He compares this to relative Google+ groups sizes as an index of popularity.
- Swords &Wizardry 826
- DCC RPG 776
- Lamentations of the Flame Princess 498
- Basic Fantasy 387
- Labyrinth Lord 382
- Adventurer Conquerer King 347
- Castles & Crusades 303
- OSRIC 110
But this brings up the larger question again. Are eliminating the necessity of a certain rules system (D&D Basic, Advanced, 2nd ed) just to exchange it for another (Basic Fantasy, ACKS, DCC)?
So when looking for a OSR supplement, adventure or add-on do the clone rules matter to you?
Back in the day we used pretty much everything with everything else. Still do in fact.
For example I mentioned a while back how you can use ACKS with the B/X Companion or even B/X Companion with Labyrinth Lord or Basic Fantasy. Those are easy though due to their relationship back to Basic D&D.
What are your experiences? Do you ignore S&W's single save when using the Tome of Horrors with Basic Fantasy? Do you convert on the fly?