TheRPGSite

So I made this thread on rpg.net, but I thought that you guys might enjoy it as well.

Original D&D Retro Clones:

The Big Brown Book: (http://www.feysquare.com/the-big-brown-book) Based off of the 3 Little Brown Books, except it uses the 1970s wargame Chainmail as a base in regards to OD&D's roots.

Delving Deeper: (http://bravehalfling.com/page18.html) A game dedicated to emulating the rules and feel of 1974 D&D.

Microlite74: (http://www.retroroleplaying.com/content/microlite74) A minimalist, rules-light variant of Original D&D.

Swords & Wizardry: (http://www.swordsandwizardry.com/) A simple and quick to learn simulacrum based off of 1974 D&D.  Available in the White Box Set (based off the 3 Little Brown Books), and Swords & Wizardry Complete (emulating the 3 LBBs, plus supplements.

Woodland Warriors: (http://www.lulu.com/shop/simon-washbourne/woodland-warriors-rpg/paperback/product-16057137.html) A Redwall-like RPG where players take up the roles of anthropomorphic rodents fighting to protect their homes against weasels, rats, and other predatory animals.

Swords & Wizardry Variants:

Backswords & Bucklers: (http://tiedtoakite.com/backswords_bucklers) An S&W variant based off of Elizabethan England.

Crypts & Things: (http://d101games.com/books/crypts-and-things/) A dark fantasy Swords & Wizardry variant.

Blood & Bullets: (http://beyondbeliefgames.webs.com/Blood%20&%20Bullets.pdf) Old West variant, with Trailblazers, Gamblers, and other iconic archetypes.

Sabres & Witchery: (http://beyondbeliefgames.webs.com/Sabres_Witchery%20v1.pdf) Monster Hunters in 18th Century Europe.

Ancient Mysteries & Lost Treasure: (http://beyondbeliefgames.webs.com/Ancient%20Mysteries_v.1.pdf) A modern game of thrilling adventures among ancient ruins and far-flung civilizations (think Indiana Jones).

Stone & Wood: (http://www.freewebs.com/beyondbeliefgames/Stone%20&%20Wood.pdf) Set in "The Land," from The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant.

Holmes, B/X, BECMI, and Rules Cyclopedia Retro Clones:

Adventurer Conqueror King: (http://www.autarch.co/) A game where the players take the roles of adventurers who start out as inexperienced explorers, but then become barons setting up territory in the wilds, and eventually rulers.  Based off of the B/X ruleset.

B/X Companion: (http://bxblackrazor.blogspot.com/2010/07/what-hell-is-bx-companion.html) Intended to be the mythical 3rd Volume of the Moldvay/Cook set.

Blueholme: (http://dreamscapedesign.net/2013/01/10/blueholme-prentice-rules-go-live/) Currently a work in progress, this RPG is a variant of the Holmes version of Basic D&D.

Dangers & Dweomers: (http://artikid.altervista.org/files/dangersdweomers.pdf) An "Advanced Basic" version of D&D, modeled after the Rules Cyclopedia.

Dark Dungeons: (http://www.gratisgames.webspace.virginmedia.com/darkdungeons.html) Named after the infamous Jack Chick strip, Dark Dungeons is inspired by the Dungeons & Dragons Rules Cyclopedia.

Labyrinth Lord: (http://www.goblinoidgames.com/labyrinthlord.html) One of the oldest retro clones, it's a faithful adaption of 1974-1981 Original D&D.  Based off of the B/X ruleset.  Also has a Original Edition Characters, a "Player's Handbook" equivalent to the game.

Lamentations of the Flame Princess: (http://www.lotfp.com/RPG/) A combination of old school D&D and weird fantasy, LotFP is a darker, grittier game with an emphasis on an unknown, dangerous world full of horror.  Modeled after the B/X ruleset.

Wizards, Warriors, & Wyrms: (http://wizardslore.weebly.com/uploads/4/3/6/1/4361144/www.pdf) A Holmes Basic retroclone.

1st Edition Retro Clones:

Labyrinth Lord Advanced Edition Compendium: (http://goblinoidgames.com/labyrinthlord.html) The Labyrinth Lord game, adapted to incorporate Advanced Dungeons & Dragons options as variant rules for it.

OSRIC: (http://www.knights-n-knaves.com/osric/) An Open Gaming variant of the 1st Edition AD&D rules, edited and streamlined for easy reference.

2nd Edition Retro Clones:

For Gold and Glory: (http://www.feysquare.com/for-gold-glory) A retro clone dedicated to simulating 2nd Edition as closely as possible.

Myth & Magic (http://www.newhavengames.com/?page_id=23)

3rd Edition Retro Clones:

Fantasycraft: (http://www.crafty-games.com/product_catalog/fantasycraft) A toolkit-like version of 3rd Edition, with a variety of options for character and campaign customization, notable for relatively balanced monster PCs.

Microlite20: (http://www.retroroleplaying.com/content/microlite20-rpg-collection) A bare-essentials, minimalist RPG, with all the basic rules on a single sheet of paper.

Pathfinder RPG: (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/) An Open Gaming variant of 3rd Edition D&D, with tweaked races, classes, and spells, promising "improvements upon the 3.5 system."

Radiance RPG: (http://radiancerpg.com/) A D20-System based game which blends D&D fantasy with a "modern age of science" and steampunk elements.

D&D Emulators and Other RPGs (RPGs which may not fit into any other category):

3d6 In Order: (http://www.lulu.com/shop/richard-tongue/3d6-in-order/paperback/product-18954562.html) A Beer & Pretzels game which is named after a common method of ability score generation, 3d6 In Order has a quick and simple character generation to get playing within minutes.  Started out as a set of house rules for Swords & Wizardry, but then became its own game.

Adventures Dark & Deep: (http://www.adventuresdarkanddeep.com/) An RPG based on a "What If?" scenario if Gary Gygax never left TSR and took control of the development of 2nd Edition.

Ambition & Avarice (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/105884/Ambition-%26-Avarice)

Balrogs & Bagginses: (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8azW7IbtcxzalBIRUl0VW5zY1k/edit?pli=1) An RPG loosely based off of the B/X ruleset to design adventures in Tolkien's Middle Earth setting.  RPG.net thread. (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?663921-D-amp-D-in-Middle-Earth/page7)

Basic Fantasy Role-Playing: (http://basicfantasy.org/) A free RPG which uses the d20 system of 3rd Edition, yet emulates rules-light play modeled on the classic D&D of the early 1980s.

Blood & Treasure: (http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/jmstater) A retroclone which takes a little bit of everything from the first 3 editions.

Blood, Guts and Glory: (http://www.gratisgames.webspace.virginmedia.com/bloodgutsandglory.html) Set in a post-apocalyptic Elizabethan England, this RPG combines elements from 3rd Edition D&D and Rolemaster.  Also known as Darkest Dungeons.

Burning THAC0: (http://www.burningwheel.org/wiki/images/3/36/BurningTHAC0.pdf) A game which uses the Burning Wheel ruleset to emulate old-school dungeon crawling.

Castles & Crusades: (http://trolllord.com/cnc/index.html) An RPG which tries to mimic the feel of 1st Edition AD&D, while incorporating some characteristics from 3rd Edition.  One of the earliest retro clones.

Dark Passages (http://www3.telus.net/public/uncouths/dpcomplete.pdf)

Dungeon Crawl Classics: (http://www.goodmangames.com/dccrpg.html) A game derived from OD&D and the Appendix N literature, with an emphasis on the high-lethality "fantasy Vietnam" play-style of old school gaming.

Epees & Sorcellerie: (https://sites.google.com/site/wizardinabottle/epeesetsorcellerie) A French retro clone.  Has a combat system based off of the Chainmail war game and uses 2d6 as the primary resolution roll.

Forward to Adventure! (http://www.flyingmice.com/FTA.html) A simple, streamlined RPG with an emphasis on fast-flowing heroics.

Flying Swordsmen: (http://lordgwydion.blogspot.com/p/flying-swordsmen-rpg.html) An RPG inspired by the Wuxia genre of martial arts.

Hackmaster Series: (http://www.kenzerco.com/hackmaster/) Hackmaster is a game inspired by AD&D 2nd Edition, but departed from the baseline with its own rules and tropes.  Available as Hackmaster 4th Edition (a meta-joke to the fictional 1st-3rd Editions in KoDT comic), Hackmaster Basic, and Hackmaster Advanced/5th Edition.

Heroes Against Darkness: (http://heroesagainstdarkness.blogspot.com.au/p/heroes-against-darkness-downloads.html) An rpg which combines aspects D&D across the years, from Basic all the way to 4th Edition.

Mazes & Minotaurs: (http://storygame.free.fr/MAZES.htm) An RPG which takes inspiration from Greco-Roman myths and legends.

Old School Hack: (http://www.oldschoolhack.net/) A variant of the Red Box Hack.

Redbox Hack: (http://redboxhack.blogspot.com/) A modified version of the Red Box, combining traditional D&D tropes with some indie game elements.

Searchers of the Unknown: (https://sites.google.com/site/wizardinabottle/searchers-of-the-unknown) A minimalist, 1 page ruleset to play D&D-style fantasy adventures.  Also has a collection of various homebrewed variants. (http://www.retroroleplaying.com/content/searchers-unknown-rpg-collection)

Shadow, Sword, & Spell: (http://www.rogue-games.net/SSS/) Fantasy RPG with pulp influence.

Spellcraft & Swordplay: (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/index.php?filters=0_0_0_0&manufacturers_id=3869&src=CommunityForum1) A retroclone which goes further back than most and borrows elements from the Chainmail wargame to combine Original D&D (plus Supplement I: Greyhawk).

Stars Without Number: (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/86467/Stars-Without-Number%3A-Free-Edition) A retro science fiction role-playing game inspired by the OSR which uses a blend of OD&D and Traveller rulesets.

Tombs & Terrors: (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/84759/Tombs-%26-Terrors-Fantasy-Role-Playing) A retroclone inspired by Castles & Crusades.

Warriors & Warlocks: (http://grognardia.blogspot.co.uk/2009/05/review-warriors-warlocks.html) A 2nd Edition Mutants & Masterminds supplement which gives builds, alternate rules, and suggestions on how to recreate D&D-esque fantasy gaming with the ruleset.

Warrior, Rogue, & Mage: (http://www.stargazergames.eu/games/warrior-rogue-mage/) A rules-light RPG which uses 3 base stats for its ruleset, named after the iconic classes.  Respectively, they measure a character's combat prowess, stealth capabilities, and academic expertise.

Wayfarers RPG: (http://yeoldegamingcompanye.com/wayfarersmain.htm) Not necessarily intended to emulate the feel of any specific edition, Wayfarers attempts to construct a unique ruleset to simulate adventure in a D&D-esque fantasy world.

If I've missed any Retro Clones or D&D Emulators, or one of them is in the wrong category, please tell me!  Anything to help improve the list is appreciated!

Adventurer Conqueror King belongs in the "Other" category; it's decidedly its own thing.

Astonishing Swordsmen and Sorcerers of Hyperborea. One that I want to buy but am too broke to at the moment. I think it's probably a 1e clone more than anything else from what I've read about it, though it uses something else for thief skills.

For 3e, you also have the Radiance RPG, which seems to be a 3e/4e hybrid in some ways.

http://www.radiancerpg.com/

Not my cup of tea, but slickly done

Crypts and Things (http://d101games.com/books/crypts-and-things/): A Swords and Wizardry variant that emulates the 'swords and sorcery' genre, with bits of 'weird fantasy' as well (e.g., R. E. Howard, C. A. Smith, F. Leiber, M. Moorcock).

My reason for not including Adventurer, Conqueror, King in the Other category was that I heard people say that it was based off of the B/X rules of D&D.

I'll check out the Radiance RPG later.  The thing with d20-based RPGs is that a lot of them just use the rules to create all sorts of settings.  A retro clone, in my view, is an RPG attempting to emulate the feel, rules, and themes of a certain edition of D&D.

Added Crypts & Things to the list.

No Hackmaster 4e?  It's AD&D like but departs pretty heavily.

Tombs & Terrors (http://http://www.rpgnow.com/product/84759/Tombs-%26-Terrors-Fantasy-Role-Playing?term=tombs+%26+) is kinda Castles & Crusades inspired

I reckon Old School Hack (http://www.oldschoolhack.net/) and Dungeon World (http://www.dungeon-world.com/) go in the Others category.

Note that Crypts and Things has a much more darker tone, with a bestiary that allows for some creepy gaming.

That is a plethora of rulesets.

Whatever their preferred D&D edition, or hybrid of D&D editions, there just about has to be something for everyone by now.

Neoclassical Geek Revival? http://zzarchov.blogspot.kr/2011/12/neoclassical-geek-revival.html

Quote from: Simon W;606880Tombs & Terrors (http://http://www.rpgnow.com/product/84759/Tombs-%26-Terrors-Fantasy-Role-Playing?term=tombs+%26+) is kinda Castles & Crusades inspired

How could you not plug your own excellent S&W-based games (http://beyondbeliefgames.webs.com/freestuff.htm)?  There's Blood & Bullets Old West RPG (western based, with Shootists, Gamblers & Trailblazers), Sabres & Witchery (18th Century supernatural monster hunters), and Ancient Mysteries & Lost Treasures (Modern exploration & adventure).  And I just saw your Stone & Wood (Fantasy roleplaying set in "The Land", from the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant).  You're a busy guy.

Also, not Simon's, but there's Ruins and Ronin (http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/mike-davison/ruins-ronin-pdf/ebook/product-17505627.html), an Asian inspired version of S&W.

Quote from: Zachary The First;606925That is a plethora of rulesets.

Whatever their preferred D&D edition, or hybrid of D&D editions, there just about has to be something for everyone by now.

Wonderful isn't it?

I would also point out Backswords & Bucklers (http://tiedtoakite.com/backswords_bucklers), which is an Elizabethan-inspired variant of Swords & Wizardry.


-TGA

QuoteOriginal D&D Retro Clones:

Epees & Sorcellerie: (https://sites.google.com/site/wizardinabottle/epeesetsorcellerie) A French retro clone.  Need more information.

It's a "what if" game in the vein of Spellcraft & Swordplay, something between Chainmail and OD&D, using 2d6 instead of d20. So it belongs in the "Other" category.

QuoteOthers (Retro Clones which don't fit into the above categories):

ELEGIA/Retro Phaze: (http://www.lulu.com/shop/john-higgins/retro-phaze-ebook/ebook/product-15391185.html) An retro clone which combines elements of eight-bit video game rpgs and old school D&D.

From the introduction:
"Retro Phase, despite the title, is not a retro clone. It doesn't actually clone any other RPG."
And it shows: Retro Phaze and its predecessor Elegia utilize a d6 pool (roll and keep) system.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;606983It's a "what if" game in the vein of Spellcraft & Swordplay, something between Chainmail and OD&D, using 2d6 instead of d20. So it belongs in the "Other" category.

Changed and added more information.

From the introduction:
"Retro Phase, despite the title, is not a retro clone. It doesn't actually clone any other RPG."
And it shows: Retro Phaze and its predecessor Elegia utilize a d6 pool (roll and keep) system.

I made a personal rule of mine in the prg.net thread, that a game only counts as a retro clone if the designer views it as such.  In that case, I'll remove Retro Phaze.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;606875No Hackmaster 4e?  It's AD&D like but departs pretty heavily.

I heard as much about Hackmaster.  I am not familiar with its various incarnations, so I included the entire series under "Other RPGs."

Also, I added Old School Hack and Dungeon World into the Other RPGs category.

Quote from: Zachary The First;606925That is a plethora of rulesets.

Whatever their preferred D&D edition, or hybrid of D&D editions, there just about has to be something for everyone by now.

We're in a new Silver Age of Tabletop RPGs.  Old School, New School, or Indie Gamer/Dirty Evil Swine, it's a great day to be a player.

Quote from: Libertad;606873Added Crypts & Things to the list.

Thanks!  But any chance you could describe it as "a dark fantasy Swords and Wizardry variant"?  Simply noting that it is a "S&W variant" doesn't say anything about how it is (significantly) different from straight S&W. :)

3rd Edition Retro Clones:

Sword and Magic: Adventures on Fomalhaut (http://fomalhaut.lfg.hu/2011/01/17/sword-and-magic/) puts an old school spin on 3.0.

Peryton Revised Edition (http://www.perytonpublishing.com/perytonrpg.htm) is a 3.0 clone without feats. Feat-like abilities are back to class abilities and tied to character level, just like in AD&D.

Chroniques Oubliées (http://www.black-book-editions.fr/?site_id=73) is a French 3.5 clone. The defining trait: all skills, feats and spells are combined in feat chains (five per class).

Others (Retro Clones which don't fit into the above categories):

Pars Fortuna (http://matt-landofnod.blogspot.de/p/pars-fortuna.html) is a S&W variant with an exotic twist: Race-as-class is taken to an extreme as all classes are Talislanta-like races. ("No Elves!" And no humans, either...)
While fully playable on its own it is basically a S&W-compatible toolkit of variant classes, skill system and magic system.
IMHO one of the most fascinating clones out there.

Mystery Men! (http://matt-landofnod.blogspot.de/p/mystery-men.html) is a rules-lite superhero role-playing game based on the OD&D/S&W. Super powers are modeled after the familiar D&D spells.

Tales of the Space Princess  (http://matt-landofnod.blogspot.de/2012/02/space-princess-has-arrived.html) is a Flash Gordon-like SF game based on OD&D/S&W.

Quote from: Zachary The First;606925That is a plethora of rulesets.

Whatever their preferred D&D edition, or hybrid of D&D editions, there just about has to be something for everyone by now.

I dunno, there's actually a lack of AD&D styled clones. Most seem to be either OD&D based or Moldvay Basic based.

Quote from: JeremyR;607117I dunno, there's actually a lack of AD&D styled clones. Most seem to be either OD&D based or Moldvay Basic based.

Yeah; for pure AD&D there's...OSRIC, Hackmaster 4e and...that's about it really.

Quote from: JeremyR;607117I dunno, there's actually a lack of AD&D styled clones. Most seem to be either OD&D based or Moldvay Basic based.

Once you strip out the Gygaxisms from AD&D, rectify the confusing parts, and peel away all the bits that the OGL can't stretch to cover, B/X or the LBB are about all that's left. A lot of what makes AD&D what it is is text or content that you can't really retroclone.

I would say it is more of a matter of AD&D 1E being deliberately designed to be fairly tied-down and not leave heaps of room for interpretation, whereas OD&D-Holmes-B/X-BECMI-RC had a bit more of a DIY air about it (especially in the OD&D to B/X era), so if you want to do a retroclone with a particular spin or twist rather than simply replicating the rules it's much easier to do it using OD&D or B/X as a basis.

Quote from: Akrasia;607034Thanks!  But any chance you could describe it as "a dark fantasy Swords and Wizardry variant"?  Simply noting that it is a "S&W variant" doesn't say anything about how it is (significantly) different from straight S&W. :)

149 pages of Swords and Sorcery fun. Be a wild Barbarian, a deadly Fighter, a soul-torn Magician or a sword sharp canny Thief, fighting evil Tyrants, foul Sorcerers and demons in a world rapidly dying and heading towards its final Nemesis.

The ruleset rolls cleric and magic users into one class which casts magic which is White/Grey/Black with hideous costs (usually from some poor victim) of casting Black magic.
It has new and interesting variants on the thief and he barbarian and the fighter has a few extra twists to make it more varied without needing 3e overhead.
It uses saving throws as skills and everyone can sneak or backstab.
The bestiary is deeply creepy and one reviewer said that alone made him want to play the game.
It has advice on how to Howard/Smith your game and make it truly S&S.
It is nicely illustrated.

I have played it twice, it does what is says on the tin, I know the writer, I don't like D&D much but it was an interesting variant that is more than simply a clone. [which may or may not increase it's utility to you]

Quote from: JeremyR;607117I dunno, there's actually a lack of AD&D styled clones. Most seem to be either OD&D based or Moldvay Basic based.

For the 4 years I played D&D I ran B/X, but also played AD&D.
I made an active choice to run B/X, it seemed a cleaner simpler game that had more consistency and less 'fog' about it.
Many friends mocked me for not being "advanced", but they enjoyed my games and after a while I went to University and discovered RuneQuest.
Funny how many retro people now appear to have been fans of the simpler rulesets after all, or are the AD&D peeps still playing with the old rulesets or are they the 3e and 4e people?

Quote from: JeremyR;607117I dunno, there's actually a lack of AD&D styled clones.

Obviously OSRIC can't be topped. It is the be-all, end-all clone of AD&D.

But it can be argued that Blood & Treasure, which you listed under "Others", is also an AD&D clone. That game is a special case as it is a "Rosetta Stone" for the different D&Ds, the modular approach that D&D Next announced to be. Blood & Treasure is a clone of OD&D, AD&D, and a bit of D&D3, taking "a little bit of everything from the first 3 editions" but at the same time being playable as a clone of each single edition.
It's three clones in one book, and technically belongs in each category.

Quote from: tzunder;607161Funny how many retro people now appear to have been fans of the simpler rulesets after all,

That has been noticed on the OSR forums and blogs beforel. I find that funny as well.
I was always more fond of BECMI but I had to DM AD&D because of my group's insistence. (Over the long run it was easier for me to drift them to RQ, WHFRP, and a test run of MERP, than to go "back" to the kiddie version of D&D.)

Quote from: tzunder;607161or are the AD&D peeps still playing with the old rulesets or are they the 3e and 4e people?

My old AD&D players left gaming behind.

Quote from: Bobloblah;606854Adventurer Conqueror King belongs in the "Other" category; it's decidedly its own thing.

I disagree. Having reviewed it, while it certainly has innovations and isn't JUST a clone, its very much based on the RC.  If anything LotFP is better qualified to be moved to "miscellaneous", its a further deviation from the main body of old D&D rules than ACKS.

RPGPundit

Also, there is no "Hackmaster 1st-4th editions and Basic".  The "Hackmaster 4e" is a meta-joke; there was no HM 3 on back.  It's Hackmaster "5e" and Hackmaster Basic.

Old Dragon (http://olddragon.redboxeditora.com.br/) seems to be a AD&D 1E-ish clone if not earlier; I'm guessing as I have to rely on Google to translate.

Quote from: JeremyR;607117I dunno, there's actually a lack of AD&D styled clones. Most seem to be either OD&D based or Moldvay Basic based.

Wayfarers is decidedly not a clone, however some have described it as 1.5E AD&D or some sort of alternate reality 2E. It has its roots in our games from those years. IMHO it has a je ne sais quoi that speaks to those times. YMMV

Quote from: Steve Dubya;607430Old Dragon (http://olddragon.redboxeditora.com.br/) seems to be a AD&D 1E-ish clone if not earlier; I'm guessing as I have to rely on Google to translate.

More of a Mentzer B/E ("red box") clone, actually, with a few accretions like ascending AC and secondary skills.

Oh, and it's got Cthulhu on the bestiary. I just feel I should really mention this. ;)

The art is crap though.

Quote from: Libertad;606873My reason for not including Adventurer, Conqueror, King in the Other category was that I heard people say that it was based off of the B/X rules of D&D.

I'll check out the Radiance RPG later.  The thing with d20-based RPGs is that a lot of them just use the rules to create all sorts of settings.  A retro clone, in my view, is an RPG attempting to emulate the feel, rules, and themes of a certain edition of D&D.

Added Crypts & Things to the list.

Quote from: RPGPundit;607343I disagree. Having reviewed it, while it certainly has innovations and isn't JUST a clone, its very much based on the RC.  If anything LotFP is better qualified to be moved to "miscellaneous", its a further deviation from the main body of old D&D rules than ACKS.

RPGPundit

Fair enough. Having played both ACKS and the original B/X, I would never call ACKS a clone; more like a mutant offspring. There's a lot of mechanical difference between the two.

Quote from: Bobloblah;607497Fair enough. Having played both ACKS and the original B/X, I would never call ACKS a clone; more like a mutant offspring. There's a lot of mechanical difference between the two.

I'm familiar with BECMI by way of RC, and I feel ACKS would be better described as a variant ("transgenic"?) BEC or "E14 RC" (to borrow from "E6", as D&D 3e capped at level 6 is often referred to).

I haven't really run a comprehensive side-by-side compariosn, but I've checked a few details (e.g. prices for everything from a battle axe or a lantern, to a war galley or a portcullis) and it's a pretty solid match with the RC.

Oh, and this thread reminds me that I should really pick Crypts & Things one of these days. Or perhaps Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea.

In an ideal world I'd get both, but AS&SH is horribly expensive to get via mail down here. Maybe in PDF...

Not that I don't already own more D&D than I can shake a stick at.

Two more for the Other category:

Woodland Warriors (http://www.lulu.com/shop/simon-washbourne/woodland-warriors-rpg/paperback/product-16057137.html) is a Redwall/Secret of N.I.M.H./Mouse Guard adaption of OD&D.

Fantasia (http://www.lulu.com/shop/matt-demille/fantasia-core-rules/hardcover/product-14913836.html) is not a retroclone, but a generic RPG with a very AD&Dish feel (like Wayfarer in the OP, or Palladium Fantasy, or The Arcanum).

Microlite 20 (http://www.retroroleplaying.com/content/microlite20-rpg-collection) is a stripped-to-the-bare-minimum version of D&D3 that spawned a whole library of tweaks, some of which cloned earlier versions of D&D (Microlite74 is mentioned in the OP).

Quote from: The Butcher;607505I'm familiar with BECMI by way of RC, and I feel ACKS would be better described as a variant ("transgenic"?) BEC or "E14 RC" (to borrow from "E6", as D&D 3e capped at level 6 is often referred to).

I wonder what ever happened to E6.  At one time there was a push to build a set of feats to make the feat accumulation approach work but it seemed to lose stream.

Quote from: Votan;607512I wonder what ever happened to E6.  At one time there was a push to build a set of feats to make the feat accumulation approach work but it seemed to lose stream.

Too bad. It was a pretty cool idea. My players really like the vibe of it in play.

Quote from: The Butcher;607505I'm familiar with BECMI by way of RC, and I feel ACKS would be better described as a variant ("transgenic"?) BEC or "E14 RC" (to borrow from "E6", as D&D 3e capped at level 6 is often referred to).

I haven't really run a comprehensive side-by-side compariosn, but I've checked a few details (e.g. prices for everything from a battle axe or a lantern, to a war galley or a portcullis) and it's a pretty solid match with the RC.

So, if the price list is the same, it's a match? I know that's not what you're saying, but it just seems like a strange yardstick to me. The differences to me are in a lot of the basic rules of the game.

The classes are different. The races are different. The spellcasting is different. The combat rules are different. The domain rules are different (arguably one of the best parts of the game). How different does it have to be before it's not RC or B/X? It's clearly inspired by those games, but to my eyes it's also clearly not the same game.

Other clones like LL, OSRIC, Swords & Wizardry, Dark Dungeons, etc. strive to emulate, or "clone," a specific version of the game under the OGL. ACKS doesn't really do this.

Ultimately, it doesn't really matter, as the games don't need to be pigeonholed in this fashion to be enjoyed. Arguing about this would feel like an online screaming match about Star Trek canon.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;607346Also, there is no "Hackmaster 1st-4th editions and Basic".  The "Hackmaster 4e" is a meta-joke; there was no HM 3 on back.  It's Hackmaster "5e" and Hackmaster Basic.

So there's only 5th Edition and Basic?  Or 1st Edition, 2nd Edition, 5th Edition, and Basic?

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;607511Two more for the Other category:

Woodland Warriors (http://www.lulu.com/shop/simon-washbourne/woodland-warriors-rpg/paperback/product-16057137.html) is a Redwall/Secret of N.I.M.H./Mouse Guard adaption of OD&D.

Fantasia (http://www.lulu.com/shop/matt-demille/fantasia-core-rules/hardcover/product-14913836.html) is not a retroclone, but a generic RPG with a very AD&Dish feel (like Wayfarer in the OP, or Palladium Fantasy, or The Arcanum).

Microlite 20 (http://www.retroroleplaying.com/content/microlite20-rpg-collection) is a stripped-to-the-bare-minimum version of D&D3 that spawned a whole library of tweaks, some of which cloned earlier versions of D&D (Microlite74 is mentioned in the OP).

I'll include the first and third entries, then.  Thanks!

Quote from: RPGPundit;607343I disagree. Having reviewed it, while it certainly has innovations and isn't JUST a clone, its very much based on the RC.  If anything LotFP is better qualified to be moved to "miscellaneous", its a further deviation from the main body of old D&D rules than ACKS.

RPGPundit

I own the free version of LotFP, but since I don't have the OD&D rules, I do not know where it's deviated.  Specifically what changes has it made which would merit its move?  Or is this just for comparison, and the entry's location is fine as is?

Quote from: Bobloblah;607600So, if the price list is the same, it's a match? I know that's not what you're saying, but it just seems like a strange yardstick to me. The differences to me are in a lot of the basic rules of the game.

Which is why I admitted upfront that I hadn't run a thorough side-by-side comparison. In broad terms, though, I get the feeling that there's more addition (new stuff) than revision (actual change to the rules).

Quote from: Bobloblah;607600Ultimately, it doesn't really matter, as the games don't need to be pigeonholed in this fashion to be enjoyed. Arguing about this would feel like an online screaming match about Star Trek canon.

I don't give a shit about labels either.

Quote from: The Good Assyrian;606951I would also point out Backswords & Bucklers (http://tiedtoakite.com/backswords_bucklers), which is an Elizabethan-inspired variant of Swords & Wizardry.

One of my favorite variants to come out of the OSR.

The list also needs Flying Swordsmen (http://lordgwydion.blogspot.com/p/flying-swordsmen-rpg.html), for games set in fantasy China.

Added Backswords & Bucklers, and Flying Swordsmen to the list.

Swords & Wizardry variants seem to be popular, so I gave them their own category.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;607346Also, there is no "Hackmaster 1st-4th editions and Basic".  The "Hackmaster 4e" is a meta-joke; there was no HM 3 on back.  It's Hackmaster "5e" and Hackmaster Basic.

Quote from: Libertad;607601So there's only 5th Edition and Basic?  Or 1st Edition, 2nd Edition, 5th Edition, and Basic?

The only editions are "4th Edition" (published in 2001) and the later Hackmaster Basic (not built on a D&D engine, published 2009) and Hackmaster 5E/Advanced (also not built on a D&D engine).

Hackmaster 1E through 3E are fictional games in the comics world of Knights of the Dinner Table.  I think they roughly correlate to 0D&D (HM 1E), 1st Edition AD&D (HM 2E) and 2nd Edition AD&D (HM 3E).  But they are only references in a comic book.  When Kenzer got the license for the AD&D engine and wrote the first real Hackmaster game, they called it "Hackmaster 4th Edition" to carry over the Knights of the Dinner Table connection.

Thank you for the explanation.  I'll be sure to include this in the list.

Dungeon World without a doubt needs to be removed from that list.  A Retro-clone is something that attempts to clone an older version of D&D in some fashion or another.  Dungeon World isn't anything remotely close to that in any way shape or form.

I can create a game that seems kinda like D&D by taking certain mechanics from Traveller, Torg, or WEG Star Wars, but that is not a retro-clone.

You basically need a Retro-But Not Clone Category(which is where a lot would fit in like Wayfarers and F:tA!).  BTW, Dungeon World wouldn't fit into that either.  There's also absolutely nothing Retro about it.

Quote from: EOTB;607667The only editions are "4th Edition" (published in 2001) and the later Hackmaster Basic (not built on a D&D engine, published 2009) and Hackmaster 5E/Advanced (also not built on a D&D engine).

Hackmaster 1E through 3E are fictional games in the comics world of Knights of the Dinner Table.  I think they roughly correlate to 0D&D (HM 1E), 1st Edition AD&D (HM 2E) and 2nd Edition AD&D (HM 3E).  But they are only references in a comic book.  When Kenzer got the license for the AD&D engine and wrote the first real Hackmaster game, they called it "Hackmaster 4th Edition" to carry over the Knights of the Dinner Table connection.

Edit: NVM, I see who you were replying to there.

Quote from: CRKrueger;607697Dungeon World without a doubt needs to be removed from that list.  A Retro-clone is something that attempts to clone an older version of D&D in some fashion or another.  Dungeon World isn't anything remotely close to that in any way shape or form.

I can create a game that seems kinda like D&D by taking certain mechanics from Traveller, Torg, or WEG Star Wars, but that is not a retro-clone.

You basically need a Retro-But Not Clone Category(which is where a lot would fit in like Wayfarers and F:tA!).  BTW, Dungeon World wouldn't fit into that either.  There's also absolutely nothing Retro about it.

Isn't DW a storygame?  I mean, by their own admission.  If it's not I apologize.

Quote from: Libertad;607601I own the free version of LotFP, but since I don't have the OD&D rules, I do not know where it's deviated.  Specifically what changes has it made which would merit its move?  Or is this just for comparison, and the entry's location is fine as is?

Only fighters gain bonuses to hit, the skill system is different, combat options are quite different, and the spell list is considerably changed (things like most combat spells, as well as raise dead, are out, a bunch of very weird spells and a very detailed summoning spell are in).

RPGPundit

Quote from: thedungeondelver;607718Isn't DW a storygame?  I mean, by their own admission.  If it's not I apologize.

They don't call it a storygame that I have heard.  The Xworld system is a very odd system.  If you look at just the mechanics, it seems basically traditional, and plays traditional.

There are however some narrative decisions made by the player not the character, however, that isn't necessarily baked into the game.  The idea is that there are certain mechanics, called "moves" that both the players and GMs can do.  Some of the moves require some OOC thinking by the player, but the moves could easily be changed to be completely IC.

There is no shared narration, the GM interprets all dice results.

What the Xworld system is, is a new-school design toolkit that is set up to give GMs and players the tools to play a game following certain trope and genre conventions.

What it is not, by any stretch of the imagination is anything Retro, or anything Clone.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;607718Isn't DW a storygame?  I mean, by their own admission.  If it's not I apologize.

Its definitely not a retro-clone in any case, and I wouldn't call it an OSR game either.

RPGPundit

Kickstarter Description:

Game with modern rules and old school style. (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sage-kobold/dungeon-world-a-game-with-modern-rules-and-old-sch-0)

It's not specifically emulating earlier rules, but at least the feel of Old School Gaming.  Unlike most other RPGs on the list it's not trying to go for a certain Edition style.

@ CRKrueger and Dungeon Delver: I have not seen the designers refer to their product as a retro clone or story-game in any case.

I'm taking it off for the time being.

This reminds me of one more point: do you personally think that a game can be a retro clone if it emulates the thematics of old school play, despite using a 'modern' rules system?

Quote from: Libertad;608382This reminds me of one more point: do you personally think that a game can be a retro clone if it emulates the thematics of old school play, despite using a 'modern' rules system?

That makes it hard to see it being a clone of an older system, then.  It seems more like a modern game that is inspired by older play; kind of like what D&D Next is aiming for.

It didn't feel right to take off Dungeon World and Retro Phaze, so I decided to make a new category: Old School but not Retro Clone.  It's when a game designer uses themes and elements from "Old School Gaming" yet uses a more "modern" system, or does not view their RPG as a Retro Clone.

Quote from: Libertad;608680I decided to make a new category: Old School but not Retro Clone.  It's when a game designer uses themes and elements from "Old School Gaming" yet uses a more "modern" system, or does not view their RPG as a Retro Clone.

In which case I'd be of the opinion that Shadow, Sword and Spell should be in there. Game mechanic-wise it bears no resemblance to D&D - it uses 2D12 with degrees of success as opposed to a D20 based system.

Question is: does any game which tries to emulate 'sword and sorcery' count as 'Old School' for this purpose? In which case, Jaws of the Six Serpents could be added, Barbarians of Lemuria, On Mighty Thews, BASH Fantasy and several others.

Back to retroclones, where would Stars Without Number fit, if at all? Based of some version of D&D from what I understand, but it's not fantasy. Does that matter?

The only other one I can think of that's not on the list is Warriors & Warlocks (http://grognardia.blogspot.co.uk/2009/05/review-warriors-warlocks.html).

Have to add Arrows of Indra to the list in a month or so...

RPGPundit

Quote from: Derabar;6087051. In which case I'd be of the opinion that Shadow, Sword and Spell should be in there. Game mechanic-wise it bears no resemblance to D&D - it uses 2D12 with degrees of success as opposed to a D20 based system.

2. Question is: does any game which tries to emulate 'sword and sorcery' count as 'Old School' for this purpose? In which case, Jaws of the Six Serpents could be added, Barbarians of Lemuria, On Mighty Thews, BASH Fantasy and several others.

3. Back to retroclones, where would Stars Without Number fit, if at all? Based of some version of D&D from what I understand, but it's not fantasy. Does that matter?

4. The only other one I can think of that's not on the list is Warriors & Warlocks (http://grognardia.blogspot.co.uk/2009/05/review-warriors-warlocks.html).

1. Okay.

2. Is it trying to emulate D&D?  Barbarians of Lemuria, from what I hear, is more of a Conan RPG retro clone.

3. I don't know.  What are other folks' thoughts on Stars Without Number?

4. I'll add that.  Thanks!

Also, looking at Radiance RPG.  It's definitely inspired by 3rd Edition and Pathfinder, and the product description on amazon mentions that it would help return table-top gaming to its roots.  Sounds like a retro-clone to me.

It seems you still missed off Tombs & Terrors.

Okay, will add under "Other."

Quote from: Libertad;6089841. Okay.

2. Is it trying to emulate D&D?  Barbarians of Lemuria, from what I hear, is more of a Conan RPG retro clone.

3. I don't know.  What are other folks' thoughts on Stars Without Number?

4. I'll add that.  Thanks!

Also, looking at Radiance RPG.  It's definitely inspired by 3rd Edition and Pathfinder, and the product description on amazon mentions that it would help return table-top gaming to its roots.  Sounds like a retro-clone to me.

The concept of retro clone is now at risk of dying the death of a thousand cuts. I can only advise that you aim first and foremost to make your list actually useful for disambiguating the various alternatives, rather than worrying about thr politics of inclusion or exclusion.

That said, BoL isn't a Conan retro-clone, although it may be retro. It's a broader Swords & Sorcery game, with the name referring to Thongor, a character invented by Lin Carter. The mechanics are all-new. IMO the only game that could be accurately be called a Conan retro-clone is ZeFRS.

Quote from: Libertad;608680It didn't feel right to take off Dungeon World and Retro Phaze, so I decided to make a new category: Old School but not Retro Clone.  It's when a game designer uses themes and elements from "Old School Gaming" yet uses a more "modern" system, or does not view their RPG as a Retro Clone.

Dungeon World is neither a retro clone nor old school. It is a forgie game inspired by the old school movement, since old school is nowadays fashionable. Nothing else.

Quote from: Claudius;609304Dungeon World is neither a retro clone nor old school. It is a forgie game inspired by the old school movement, since old school is nowadays fashionable. Nothing else.

Moreso, its an attempt to subvert the old school movement by stealthily introducing Storygaming concepts under the utterly false facade of a regular RPG.

In other words, the standard Storygamer Swine dirty pool.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;609444Moreso, its an attempt to subvert the old school movement by stealthily introducing Storygaming concepts under the utterly false facade of a regular RPG.

In other words, the standard Storygamer Swine dirty pool.

RPGPundit

Subvert? I think that's a bit too conspiratorial.

Quote from: Claudius;609304Dungeon World is neither a retro clone nor old school. It is a forgie game inspired by the old school movement, since old school is nowadays fashionable. Nothing else.

Yep.

Forward to Adventure! isn't a retro-clone; it belongs in Old School but not Retro Clone (RPGs which draw on inspiration from older editions, but not the rulesets).

The Hackmaster entry is correct only for Hackmaster 4th edition. Hackmaster Basic/5th is a completely different game which shares some mechanics with Aces & Eight. I would put it in Old School Not a Retro-Clone.

Blueholme link not working, among others.

Quote from: tzunder;607161are the AD&D peeps still playing with the old rulesets or are they the 3e and 4e people?

I for one still run/play and generally prefer AD&D to any other verison of the game.

Quote from: Piestrio;609631I for one still run/play and generally prefer AD&D to any other verison of the game.

Same here.

I use AD&D material to supplement my OD&D & supplements game. Which is 75% AD&D at that point already.

Quote from: Piestrio;609631I for one still run/play and generally prefer AD&D to any other verison of the game.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;609639Same here.

Same.  AD&D is king.  I would play other games, but 1E is the RPG language I think in.

Quote from: Silverlion;609619Blueholme link not working, among others.

That's okay, there will be a DTRPG link next week. :cool:

Quote from: akiva;609482Subvert? I think that's a bit too conspiratorial.

There doesn't have to be any kind of conspiracy at all for attempted subversion to happen repeatedly.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;609847There doesn't have to be any kind of conspiracy at all for attempted subversion to happen repeatedly.

RPGPundit

My point was that you were clearly suggesting that Dungeonworld was an attempt to secretly destroy and/or ruin old-school gaming and/or the OSR--as if story gamers see old school gamers as the enemy. Which is just plain ridiculous. If anything, it's the other way around--a lot of old school type gamers seem to see story games as an atrocity and not real gaming. Which is funny 'cause so many old school gamers lament the fact that the new school gamers are so mean to them.

Quote from: akiva;609858My point was that you were clearly suggesting that Dungeonworld was an attempt to secretly destroy and/or ruin old-school gaming and/or the OSR--as if story gamers see old school gamers as the enemy. Which is just plain ridiculous. If anything, it's the other way around--a lot of old school type gamers seem to see story games as an atrocity and not real gaming. Which is funny 'cause so many old school gamers lament the fact that the new school gamers are so mean to them.

1. They're not being very "secret" about it.
2. Their primary motivation isn't so much to destroy or ruin Old School gaming (except inasmuch as their ideology requires the subversion of all regular roleplaying), as it is to try to parasitically latch onto the popularity of Old School to try to keep promoting their own ideology that has nothing to do with Old School (much like Storygaming in general continues to try to parasitically latch onto regular Roleplaying in general). Like any parasite, while its purpose is not as such the destruction of its host, the fulfilling of its purpose inevitably requires doing injury to its host.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;6101591. They're not being very "secret" about it.
2. Their primary motivation isn't so much to destroy or ruin Old School gaming (except inasmuch as their ideology requires the subversion of all regular roleplaying), as it is to try to parasitically latch onto the popularity of Old School to try to keep promoting their own ideology that has nothing to do with Old School (much like Storygaming in general continues to try to parasitically latch onto regular Roleplaying in general). Like any parasite, while its purpose is not as such the destruction of its host, the fulfilling of its purpose inevitably requires doing injury to its host.

You're the one who talked about it as if it were a secret conspiracy.

I think (1) you're very inaccurate; I don't think the story game crowd pays much attention to the old school stuff, and I don't think old school stuff is actually much (if at all) more popular than it used to be, so there isn't a popularity to be latched on to.* (2) Your language is really obnoxious. These guys are parasites? They play games you don't like; who cares? If you don't like their games, just don't play them.

This is a nice demonstration, actually, of what a lot of people (including me) don't like about a lot of the old schoolers--they idealize one style of play as the one true faith, and lash out with a lot of nastiness at people who disagree with them. I've read a lot of the posts by the story game crowd, but overall I think the tone of the OSR group is a lot more venomous: story gamers (or any other new school gamers) are immature, uncreative, parasites, morons . . . on and on.

Quote from: akiva;610235This is a nice demonstration, actually, of what a lot of people (including me) don't like about a lot of the old schoolers--they idealize one style of play as the one true faith, and lash out with a lot of nastiness at people who disagree with them. I've read a lot of the posts by the story game crowd, but overall I think the tone of the OSR group is a lot more venomous: story gamers (or any other new school gamers) are immature, uncreative, parasites, morons . . . on and on.

To be fair, this behavior certainly isn't exclusive to the old school. The storygamers, and just about every fan community referring to other fan communities, have been known to belittle and disparage others with different tastes in gaming or comics or whatever. Pundit just happens to be particularly vitriolic and obnoxious about it.

Like someone once said about academia, the fights are so vicious because the stakes are so very low.

Quote from: The Butcher;610237To be fair, this behavior certainly isn't exclusive to the old school. The storygamers, and just about every fan community referring to other fan communities, have been known to belittle and disparage others with different tastes in gaming or comics or whatever. Pundit just happens to be particularly vitriolic and obnoxious about it.

Like someone once said about academia, the fights are so vicious because the stakes are so very low.

True. But there's a big difference I've noticed. Both sides sneer at the other. But the old schoolers often seem to act like the story gamers killed their puppy; I haven't seen anywhere near the sense of outrage by the story gamers.

Quote from: akiva;609858My point was that you were clearly suggesting that Dungeonworld was an attempt to secretly destroy and/or ruin old-school gaming and/or the OSR--as if story gamers see old school gamers as the enemy. Which is just plain ridiculous. If anything, it's the other way around--a lot of old school type gamers seem to see story games as an atrocity and not real gaming. Which is funny 'cause so many old school gamers lament the fact that the new school gamers are so mean to them.

I regard Dungeon World more as an ironic love letter to OSR gaming than as an OSR game, which it certainly is not.  I don't think the authors intend to deliver the same experience with Dungeon World as, say, Dark Dungeons would.

Quote from: akiva;610235You're the one who talked about it as if it were a secret conspiracy.

I think (1) you're very inaccurate; I don't think the story game crowd pays much attention to the old school stuff, and I don't think old school stuff is actually much (if at all) more popular than it used to be, so there isn't a popularity to be latched on to.* (2) Your language is really obnoxious. These guys are parasites? They play games you don't like; who cares? If you don't like their games, just don't play them.

This is a nice demonstration, actually, of what a lot of people (including me) don't like about a lot of the old schoolers--they idealize one style of play as the one true faith, and lash out with a lot of nastiness at people who disagree with them. I've read a lot of the posts by the story game crowd, but overall I think the tone of the OSR group is a lot more venomous: story gamers (or any other new school gamers) are immature, uncreative, parasites, morons . . . on and on.

In support, Dungeon World is currently number one at DTRPG right now, not any OSR clone.  I think people are simply playing DW because it is a plain ass fun game and on the strength of how well Apocalypse World did.  People don't drop their scheckles on unfun stuff, and if AW sucked then people wouldn't buy a successor product.

DW most certainly is not aimed at the OSR crowd.

Quote from: akiva;610238True. But there's a big difference I've noticed. Both sides sneer at the other. But the old schoolers often seem to act like the story gamers killed their puppy; I haven't seen anywhere near the sense of outrage by the story gamers.

That's because Dogs in the Vineyard doesn't have a 20-25 year history of one type of play only to be replaced by Dogs in the Vineyard 4.0 using a variant of FATAL.  :D

Quote from: CRKrueger;610330That's because Dogs in the Vineyard doesn't have a 20-25 year history of one type of play only to be replaced by Dogs in the Vineyard 4.0 using a variant of FATAL.  :D

To be fair, neither does D&D--even from the beginning, there were lots of different play styles. That only grew as the game grew.

Quote from: CRKrueger;610330That's because Dogs in the Vineyard doesn't have a 20-25 year history of one type of play only to be replaced by Dogs in the Vineyard 4.0 using a variant of FATAL.  :D

Also, Dogs in the Vineyard didn't mess that up (if that's how you see it); WotC did. So why be angry with the DitV people?

Quote from: akiva;610235You're the one who talked about it as if it were a secret conspiracy.

I think (1) you're very inaccurate; I don't think the story game crowd pays much attention to the old school stuff, and I don't think old school stuff is actually much (if at all) more popular than it used to be, so there isn't a popularity to be latched on to.* (2) Your language is really obnoxious. These guys are parasites?

If the shoe fits...  How else would you describe an alien object that latches on to a healthy host for sustenance rather than trying to find its own meal ticket?

QuoteThey play games you don't like; who cares? If you don't like their games, just don't play them.

This is a nice demonstration, actually, of what a lot of people (including me) don't like about a lot of the old schoolers--they idealize one style of play as the one true faith, and lash out with a lot of nastiness at people who disagree with them. I've read a lot of the posts by the story game crowd, but overall I think the tone of the OSR group is a lot more venomous: story gamers (or any other new school gamers) are immature, uncreative, parasites, morons . . . on and on.

Really? I don't recall the OSR being the ones who suggested the other side are brain-damaged sexual abuse victims who are engaging in dangerous delusions by wanting Immersion.

RPGPundit

Quote from: akiva;610238True. But there's a big difference I've noticed. Both sides sneer at the other. But the old schoolers often seem to act like the story gamers killed their puppy; I haven't seen anywhere near the sense of outrage by the story gamers.

Outrage is usually reserved to the offended party, the ones who are on the defensive against an attack on their person.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;610675If the shoe fits...  How else would you describe an alien object that latches on to a healthy host for sustenance rather than trying to find its own meal ticket?

How is a game alien to another game? Perhaps it's RPGs in general, and D&D in particular, that the parasites latching on to wargaming.

Quote from: RPGPundit;610675Really? I don't recall the OSR being the ones who suggested the other side are brain-damaged sexual abuse victims who are engaging in dangerous delusions by wanting Immersion.

When and where was that said? And is it a sentiment widely repeated by story gamers? 'Cause the idea that everyone who isn't an old school gamer is immature, stupid, lacking in creativity, and/or is destroying the hobby has been said repeatedly, by *many* old schoolers (including several of your posts in this message).

And also, why do you care if someone said that about you? Obviously that's an obnoxious and dumb-ass thing to say; so what? Ignore the person who said it. Or are you so sensitive that you can't ignore the opinion of someone you've probably never met?

Quote from: RPGPundit;610676Outrage is usually reserved to the offended party, the ones who are on the defensive against an attack on their person.

RPGPundit

You mean the ones who repeatedly call non-old schoolers borderline retarded, completely uncreative, and parasites? You're right--those are far from personal attacks.

Let's cut the 'swine talk' and get this excellent thread back on track.

In a rare visit to Rpgnet Incame across a D&D hack for MiddleEarth that is quite brilliant. It's loosely based on B/X and I would put it in the 'other' category.

It's the brainchild of Lars Dangly and is available for free download from Googledocs. Based on a quick read through I think it's easily the best d&d conversion for MiddleEarth. Even if you don't agree with every decision taken this should be the baseline document for making it work.

The game is not fully complete but it's close enough to be fully usable as is. The link below is to the thread that lead to the game. The link to Googledocs is on page 7.

][URL="http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?663921-D-amp-D-in-Middle-Earth" (//%5BURL="http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?663921-D-amp-D-in-Middle-Earth"%5B/URL)[/URL]

Quote from: akiva;610700How is a game alien to another game? Perhaps it's RPGs in general, and D&D in particular, that the parasites latching on to wargaming.

Sorry no, but there's the exact answer to your question:  RPGs developed out of wargaming, but did Gygax and co. say "this is how wargaming always ought to have been!" and started calling their new games "wargames" and tried to introduce roleplaying mechanics into all wargames?
No.
They had the balls to say "this is a new hobby: roleplaying games", and try to make it on their own rather than using the more familiar (at that time) title of "wargame" as the way to get sales.They dared to be independent.

Storygames don't dare to do that. Instead, they want to just subvert the RPG hobby, replacing RPG systems with "storygame systems" which are not the same.

QuoteWhen and where was that said? And is it a sentiment widely repeated by story gamers?

By Ron Edwards, creator of the Forge, GNS theory, and the main architect of Storygames. So yes, its absolutely official party line. And no significant name in storygames has ever repudiated him for saying it. It is what storygamers believe, and it is a part of the assumptions behind the Theory that drives all storygame mechanics (that is, the rejection of immersion and emulation for those alleged reasons).

QuoteAnd also, why do you care if someone said that about you? Obviously that's an obnoxious and dumb-ass thing to say; so what? Ignore the person who said it. Or are you so sensitive that you can't ignore the opinion of someone you've probably never met?

I care what an entire movement that is determined to redefine my hobby says, not about me, but about the hobby.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Fiasco;610819Let's cut the 'swine talk' and get this excellent thread back on track.

In a rare visit to Rpgnet Incame across a D&D hack for MiddleEarth that is quite brilliant. It's loosely based on B/X and I would put it in the 'other' category.

It's the brainchild of Lars Dangly and is available for free download from Googledocs. Based on a quick read through I think it's easily the best d&d conversion for MiddleEarth. Even if you don't agree with every decision taken this should be the baseline document for making it work.

The game is not fully complete but it's close enough to be fully usable as is. The link below is to the thread that lead to the game. The link to Googledocs is on page 7.

][URL="http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?663921-D-amp-D-in-Middle-Earth" (//%5BURL="http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?663921-D-amp-D-in-Middle-Earth"%5B/URL)[/URL]

I'll add it to the list, then!

I'm looking at the PDF, and it's a very beautiful piece of work!

Quote from: RPGPundit;610888Sorry no, but there's the exact answer to your question:  RPGs developed out of wargaming, but did Gygax and co. say "this is how wargaming always ought to have been!" and started calling their new games "wargames" and tried to introduce roleplaying mechanics into all wargames?
No.

If that's true, then why was the original edition described as being for "fantastic medieval wargames"? Sounds to me that Gygaz & Co were trying to be "parasites" (to use your term) in the wargaming community. That doesn't sound ballsy to me. And, just like old school RPGers, there are still wargamers who hate Gygax and RPGs for destroying wargaming.

Quote from: RPGPundit;610888By Ron Edwards, creator of the Forge, GNS theory, and the main architect of Storygames. So yes, its absolutely official party line. And no significant name in storygames has ever repudiated him for saying it. It is what storygamers believe, and it is a part of the assumptions behind the Theory that drives all storygame mechanics (that is, the rejection of immersion and emulation for those alleged reasons).

One of the things people on this forum--and you in particular--point out frequently (and correctly) is that "OSR" is misleading in some ways because people involved do different things and have different expectations. But somehow the storygamers are all the same and have a "party line"? That's ridiculous--once again, you are doing what you (correctly) criticize others for doing to old school gamers.

There is a *huge* variety of story gamers, many of whom (maybe most of whom) were never part of the Forge scene. I've seen a lot of story gamers distance themselves from Edwards and the like. If nothing else, the most popular story games by far have little or nothing to do with the Forge.

As to your point that no one in the story gamer community has ever called out Edwards, that's simply not true. If you read the Forge post where Edwards first made that claim, there are at least several (I didn't read the whole thread--it's very long) responders who took Edwards to task for the harshness of his rhetoric. In fact, one of the Forge moderators left the site because of Edwards' comments.

And by the same token, have you, or JMal, or any of the other prominent old schoolers, stepped up and repudiated some of the hateful remarks made by some old schoolers? Not that I'm aware of. I know it's only one example, but JMal tacitly approved of such comments, and then proceeded to delete comments by people who disagreed with him.

You're entitled to your own opinions; you are not entitled to your own facts. So your justification for being a jackass is based on nonsense--that is, if you actually look at the facts. Hate on Ron Edwards all you want--I think he's a pretentious jackass--but that doesn't justify hating and insulting the whole story game community.

(In case you're wondering, I'm not a story gamer; neither am I an old schooler. I think both camps have things to offer, but either approach, by itself, is unsatisfactory to me. I don't care if other people like either; they're just not my cup of tea)

Quote from: akiva;611021(In case you're wondering, I'm not a story gamer; neither am I an old schooler. I think both camps have things to offer, but either approach, by itself, is unsatisfactory to me. I don't care if other people like either; they're just not my cup of tea)

Dude if that's true then why don't you start Your Very Own Thread on how those poor old story gamers are mistreated instead of stinking up a thread about listing old school games.

Thanks.

Getting back on topic as much as possible, Red Box Fantasy (http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/paigeoliver) (not to be confused with Redbox Hack) is an OSR-style game which is, as the name suggests, (very loosely) based on "Red Box" i.e. BECMI D&D. It is not a retroclone of any particular edition but is nevertheless very recognizably draws inspiration from old versions of D&D and especially the one it's named for. It would belong in the "Old school but not a retroclone" category, with the BECMI category being a distant second choice.

IMO it's one of the better old-school games but almost nobody talks about it or even seems to have heard of it. The player's book can be downloaded from the above address for free and I encourage people to take advantage of that as it deserves a wider audience (if you give it a read and disagree with me, hey, at least it didn't cost you anything).

Incidentally, there isn't a working link above for Redbox Hack (the link to the blog works, but the links from there to the actual game don't). Also, I strongly dispute labeling LotFP as a BECMI clone. It's based almost entirely on OD&D with almost no elements from the later Basic editions, and the changes it makes to OD&D are mostly in the opposite direction; most obviously it makes PCs less rather than more powerful.

Quote from: Fiasco;611064Dude if that's true then why don't you start Your Very Own Thread on how those poor old story gamers are mistreated instead of stinking up a thread about listing old school games.

Thanks.

You (not you personally, but OSR people and particularly Pundit) don't get to bring up what a bunch of dicks you think story gamers are, then turn around and say they're off topic for responding. You're the ones who made it on topic.

I say this as someone with exactly zero good things to say about most storygames (but far less than zero good things to say about Pundit's attitude).

Quote from: purpleplatypus;611188You (not you personally, but OSR people and particularly Pundit) don't get to bring up what a bunch of dicks you think story gamers are, then turn around and say they're off topic for responding. You're the ones who made it on topic.

I say this as someone with exactly zero good things to say about most storygames (but far less than zero good things to say about Pundit's attitude).

I just want this thread to stay on topic. I agree that The Pundit didn't help things either but the day won't dawn where he lets a 'swine' go unchallenged.

Anyway back on topic I think LotFP is pretty clearly B/X inspired and not OD&D. For one thing the race as class was not really OD&D (elfs could adventure as magic users or fighters and kept separate totals for xp).

When you look at level and spell progressions and the like it again follows B/X.

Ad to the fact that Jim's gaming background was a hell of a lot more B/X era than OD&D and I think it's little surprise that most see LotFP as a B/X based retroclone. What I do agree is that a number of the changes introduced by James gives it more of an OD&D feel but I think his baseline rules were more modern.

In terms of power level I don't see them being weaker per we when you consider some of the default assumptions of the Weird Fantasy genre.

Quote from: Fiasco;611207Anyway back on topic I think LotFP is pretty clearly B/X inspired and not OD&D. For one thing the race as class was not really OD&D (elfs could adventure as magic users or fighters and kept separate totals for xp).

Indeed, I think that's a huge misconception about OD&D. Race and class were most certainly distinct in the original books. It makes clear that Dwarf and Hobbits/Halfings are fighters (or fighting men, rather) and as you say, Elfs can choose to be either fighting men or magic-users depending on the adventure.

(And with Greyhawk, it's virtually AD&D.)

Plus, Clerics get a spell at first level, which is un-OD&D like.

What was that old Saxon/Celtic game pitched on the big purple?

Quote from: Silverlion;611222What was that old Saxon/Celtic game pitched on the big purple?

Raedwald (http://redwald.blogspot.de/)?

Quote from: The Butcher;607505I'm familiar with BECMI by way of RC, and I feel ACKS would be better described as a variant ("transgenic"?) BEC or "E14 RC" (to borrow from "E6", as D&D 3e capped at level 6 is often referred to).

I haven't really run a comprehensive side-by-side compariosn, but I've checked a few details (e.g. prices for everything from a battle axe or a lantern, to a war galley or a portcullis) and it's a pretty solid match with the RC.

ACKS grew out of a set of house rules I wrote for my B/X campaign. The domain rules were inspired by Mentzer's Companion rules but ended up significantly departing from them.

RC was of limited utility because ACKS was strictly designed to max out at 14th level whereas RC is 36th-level focused. Thus where B/X differs from BECMI, ACKS usually follows B/X. You'll see this in the thief's skill progression, in the cleric's spell progression, etc.

Most of the changes and additions in ACKS are either (1) economic, to flesh out the high-end game; (2) rationalizations of disparate mechanics, to create two basic sub-systems (roll 1d20 v. target number, or roll 2d6 on a table); (3) following up on logical implications of a default D&D setting (e.g. races must each have their own classes, mages must be able to crossbreed monsters); or (4) introducing mechanics to balance things I thought were unbalanced (e.g. adding in cleaves).

With the Player's Companion, of course, ACKS is rapidly becoming its own beast.

Quote from: purpleplatypus;611188You (not you personally, but OSR people and particularly Pundit) don't get to bring up what a bunch of dicks you think story gamers are, then turn around and say they're off topic for responding. You're the ones who made it on topic.

I say this as someone with exactly zero good things to say about most storygames (but far less than zero good things to say about Pundit's attitude).

Your postcount proves just how invested and committed you are to this site and that you're totally not someone who came here from Storygames or the "grognards.txt" thread.

In any case, I actually do get to bring up absolutely anything I want.  However, this is a thread about making a list of retro clones; no one is talking about censoring anyone; if you want to keep discussing the topic, its just that common courtesy would demand that if you've come here specifically to argue that point and not to talk about making a list of retro clones (a list which Dungeon World, as a storygame, doesn't fit into anywhere at all), you should probably start another thread.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Derabar;6087051. Question is: does any game which tries to emulate 'sword and sorcery' count as 'Old School' for this purpose? In which case, Jaws of the Six Serpents could be added, Barbarians of Lemuria, On Mighty Thews, BASH Fantasy and several others.

2. Back to retroclones, where would Stars Without Number fit, if at all? Based of some version of D&D from what I understand, but it's not fantasy. Does that matter?

1. Does the RPG have inspiration from any of the versions of Dungeons & Dragons and/or their rulesets (or even inspired by other retroclones)?  If not, then I don't want to put it on the list.

2. From what I read, Stars Without Number tries to combine the OD&D ruleset with Traveller. I'll put it under Other.

In regards to Dungeon World, I'll the dissenting voice here and say that I think it's Old School from the designer's intentions.  If the designer created a game to be Old School, I'll put it on the list.  If a designer created a game to emulate 1st Edition, I'll put it under the 1st Edition list.  I don't have enough time and effort to look through each RPG to see if it succeeds at its stated goal.

I will put my personal feelings aside and take Dungeon World off the list if it will help put a stop to the drama in this thread.  I'd also like to request that some of the more argumentative posts get moved to another thread, as they have little bearing on the discussion at hand.

Edit: took off Dungeon World.  Some things must be sacrificed for the Greater Good.

Not exactly D&D retro clones, but then not everything on your list is anyway:

Stone & Wood, Ancient Mysteries & Lost Treasures, Blood & Bullets, Sabres & Witchery

All here:

http://beyondbeliefgames.webs.com/freestuff.htm

Thanks, Simon W!

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;611233Raedwald (http://redwald.blogspot.de/)?

That is a pretty cool concept but I would almost call it more of a setting than a full game. I do like the flavour of that game, however.

Quote from: Fiasco;611343That is a pretty cool concept but I would almost call it more of a setting than a full game.

AFAIK it was planned to be a stand alone OD&D/S&W White Box clone (when it's finished). It's still WIP. And I am looking forward to the end product which I hope will end up on Lulu as a print product.

This:

Quote from: Libertad;6113301. Does the RPG have inspiration from any of the versions of Dungeons & Dragons and/or their rulesets (or even inspired by other retroclones)?  If not, then I don't want to put it on the list.

and this:

QuoteIn regards to Dungeon World, I'll the dissenting voice here and say that I think it's Old School from the designer's intentions.  

is a contradiction. Dungeon World is based on Apocalypse World, another storygame by Vince fucking Baker. Its not inspired by any edition of D&D.  Sage Latorra was not inspired by Gary Gygax or Mentzer or Holmes, he was inspired by Vince Baker and Ron Edwards.
Its mechanics aren't based on 1e or OD&D or the RC, they're based on arguing for stakes, triggering moves, and making mechanical use of the "bonds" between characters.
The only time Sage Latorra ever gave a shit about D&D was when he tried to get me fired from consulting for it (by the way, motherfucker, if you're reading this (and I know you will be), I'm still here!).

Dungeon World isn't an homage to D&D, its an attempt to trick D&D players into "getting excited by storygames", by taking one of vince baker's games and putting the thinnest veneer of a D&D facade over it, with the specific intention of drawing people AWAY from D&D and toward a completely different hobby.
If anything, its ANTI-retro. Its specifically an attempt to salt the earth of all that was by trying to subvert all existing values. Its gramscian socialism in an RPG form.


RPGPundit

Where "consulting for it" means what exactly? Downloading and giving feedback on the playtest packets like anyone with an e-mail address can do?

Quote from: purpleplatypus;611837Where "consulting for it" means what exactly? Downloading and giving feedback on the playtest packets like anyone with an e-mail address can do?

No, it means getting paid to consult on development of d&d next.

For someone with 'no horse in this race' you could have fooled me.

Also, Pundit, that Sage guy tried to get you fired? Was this on a forum or something?

Do you know the username he goes by?

Quote from: One Horse Town;611838No, it means getting paid to consult on development of d&d next.

For someone with 'no horse in this race' you could have fooled me.

Also, Pundit, that Sage guy tried to get you fired? Was this on a forum or something?

Do you know the username he goes by?

Yeah, dish on that Pundit.

Way back in April, when it became public I'd been hired as a consultant, he posted on his blog a call to boycott WoTC until they fired me, which was subsequently apparently picked up on RPGnet and Google+; like our friend platypus, he pretended that he totally had no stake in this issue and it had nothing to do with the fact that he's a storygamer with an agenda that he knows I oppose, and fears my potential influence might actually make D&D a palatable game again, and therefore make it harder for him to subvert it with utter shit like Dungeon World.

So yeah, the bitch literally tried to take food off my table with an attempt to get me fired.

Fortunately, it became obvious pretty quick that the people behind this business were the "will never play any edition of D&D anyways" crowd, to their threats not to buy WoTC product were fairly idle, and Latorra was seen for what he was: an envious loser with an ideological agenda.

RPGPundit

Thanks for the info.  Yeah, that sound about par for the course for them.

A quick googling for those who are interested:

http://www.latorra.org/2012/04/05/swine-flew/

Google+ :

https://plus.google.com/101741476056657498230/posts/XFZZ2wdue4Y

Couldn't find an entry via google of anything at RPG.net.

Quote from: RPGPundit;611846Way back in April, when it became public I'd been hired as a consultant, he posted on his blog a call to boycott WoTC until they fired me, which was subsequently apparently picked up on RPGnet and Google+; like our friend platypus, he pretended that he totally had no stake in this issue and it had nothing to do with the fact that he's a storygamer with an agenda that he knows I oppose, and fears my potential influence might actually make D&D a palatable game again, and therefore make it harder for him to subvert it with utter shit like Dungeon World.

So yeah, the bitch literally tried to take food off my table with an attempt to get me fired.

Fortunately, it became obvious pretty quick that the people behind this business were the "will never play any edition of D&D anyways" crowd, to their threats not to buy WoTC product were fairly idle, and Latorra was seen for what he was: an envious loser with an ideological agenda.

RPGPundit

Never heard of this guy before today. Read that blog entry - he certainly knows a lot about you.

Of interest, also, is it appears that Pseudo knows Eyebeamz (Malcolm Sheppard). Weird how having knowledge after the event kinda changes everything that happened at that time.

Still, what was said about you was essentially true. I just happen to dislike them more. :p

Yeah, this Latorra character is probably a douche, and his failure to get Pundit fired should serve as further evidence of the Forge's general irrelevance these days.

But Pundit painting himself as an innocent victim in this particular episode is a joke. The man built his online persona around disparaging an entire community, often with sweeping generalizations and copious amounts of vitriol.

Latorra mobilizing his buddies against Pundit is not too different from the Pundit's usual modus operandi. He isn't even particularly abrasive in his wording. How would Pundejo react if, instead of him, Latorra (or Ron Edwards or some other Forgeite) had been appointed a consultant?

One thing that surprises me in that blog entry is how many people posted in the comments to defend me or condemn him.  Its interesting and gratifying.

Butcher: I sure as fuck wouldn't be calling for a boycott. Of course, there's one other key difference: if WoTC hired Ron Edwards it'd be a sign of their utter contempt for the D&D game by hiring someone who's always despised D&D; whereas their hiring me is a sign of their desire to return to some kind of basic sanity.  So what the guy that created dungeon world is protesting against is the fact that they're hiring people who are actually big advocates of D&D.
The people who I imagine would be protesting your theoretical hiring of edwards would be people who are actually D&D fans. The people protesting my hiring are "people who hate the pundit".
Note that even Latorra doesn't dare to claim that I'm not qualified to consult for 5e, or not an experienced D&D gamer, or not someone who would have the best interests of D&D at heart; no, he goes after my "attitude"; his whole basic argument is that he doesn't like me and other people shouldn't like me either and because of that WoTC should fire me.  And does so by engaging in behaviour every bit as aggressive as what he claims I do.  So much for there not being a war, huh?

RPGPundit

Another once-useful thread that goes down the drain of game-politics...

*sigh*

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;611919Another once-useful thread that goes down the drain of game-politics...

*sigh*

well maybe we could cull off the posts that derailed and move them to the pundit's forum.

Pundit?

You know what, I'll try and put this back on the rails: does Tunnels & Trolls fit anywhere on this master list?  yes, I know it's not "OSR" or "Retro" but you could argue it was the first attempt at replicating the D&D experience without specifically being D&D, and edition after edition has followed through the years (what is it now, 7th or 8th?).  I had the black box 5th edition and at a glance it seemed like a tongue-in-cheek take on Original D&D, but I didn't keep it long enough to really get in to it...

Quote from: One Horse Town;611838For someone with 'no horse in this race' you could have fooled me.

Where did I say that? I don't like being misquoted.

The closest thing I did say, and it's not very close, is that I don't have anything good to say about most storygames. That's absolutely true, and anyone who thinks that conflicts with anything else I've said is welcome to post a rational argument to that effect. Vague insulting insinuations, not so much.

As an example, and also to sort-of return to topic, I took one look at Dungeon World and went "over my dead body". It's nothing like older versions of D&D (and even less like the newer ones). I think the pointless limit of one character of any given class (or whatever they called them) per group was the point where I knew I'd never run it and would be reluctant to play it as written. I don't go in for the conspiracy-theory nonsense being claimed here, but apart from that most of the criticisms of it here seem accurate to me.

Quote from: RPGPundit;611907Note that even Latorra doesn't dare to claim that I'm not qualified to consult for 5e, or not an experienced D&D gamer, or not someone who would have the best interests of D&D at heart; no, he goes after my "attitude"; his whole basic argument is that he doesn't like me and other people shouldn't like me either and because of that WoTC should fire me.  

Well, it does seem like an iffy, if not downright bad, PR move, not only for the obvious reasons, but also in contrast to the much more obvious names (Frank Mentzer jumps immediately to mind) who have said they're *not* involved.

Of course, shooting themselves in the ass PR-wise is entirely in character for WotC these days, so maybe I overrated those as reasons to be sceptical of your claim.

Quote from: RPGPundit;611907One thing that surprises me in that blog entry is how many people posted in the comments to defend me or condemn him.  Its interesting and gratifying.

I'd rather have an annoying, self-righteous representative of my gaming preferences influencing D&D, than a soft-spoken, self-righteous orthodox Forgeite. The point I'm making is that your abrasive attitude is at least partly responsible for this reaction, and that if this episode annoys, saddens or infuriates you, you might want to reconsider the whole Pundit act.

Quote from: RPGPundit;611907Butcher: I sure as fuck wouldn't be calling for a boycott.

I'm not convinced.

Quote from: RPGPundit;611907The people who I imagine would be protesting your theoretical hiring of edwards would be people who are actually D&D fans. The people protesting my hiring are "people who hate the pundit".

So none of the protesters are "actual D&D fans"? No True Scotsman fallacy at its finest.

Quote from: RPGPundit;611907Note that even Latorra doesn't dare to claim that I'm not qualified to consult for 5e, or not an experienced D&D gamer, or not someone who would have the best interests of D&D at heart; no, he goes after my "attitude"; his whole basic argument is that he doesn't like me and other people shouldn't like me either and because of that WoTC should fire me.  

And does so by engaging in behaviour every bit as aggressive as what he claims I do.  So much for there not being a war, huh?

Whiny nerds whining on the Internet do not a "war" make. Also...

Quote from: Sage LatorraJust to be clear, I stand by RPGPundit's right to say these things. They're his opinions, no matter how I disagree with them. I just won't fund this kind of speech, even indirectly.

Hiring someone who says these kinds of things about fellow gamers does not fit with the goals of inclusion for D&D Next. I hadn't actually known there was this much animosity against people who just want to play and make fun games. "Swine" are D&D gamers too.

...is this your idea of "aggressive"? Really? Feel free to post other quotes if you think this one isn't representative, but I've read the stuff thedungeondelver linked above and the idea I'm getting is that, for someone who's famous for his choleric screeds against the "Swine", you're coming across as awfully thin-skinned.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;611919Another once-useful thread that goes down the drain of game-politics...

*sigh*

Still worth "stickying" for the informative OP, IMHO.

Quote from: purpleplatypus;611925Where did I say that? I don't like being misquoted.

You said this.

I say this as someone with exactly zero good things to say about most storygames (but far less than zero good things to say about Pundit's attitude).

I guess that makes you right. You didn't say you didn't have a horse in this race. You have one.

Dirk et al, sorry - but you can work around the derail (although it's more of an extension than derail ;)) if it carries on.

I think the argument whether Dungeon World is inspired by old school is a relevant discussion to have in this thread - where the idea is to list clones and games inspired by old-school.

Quote from: RPGPundit;611846Way back in April, when it became public I'd been hired as a consultant, he posted on his blog a call to boycott WoTC until they fired me, which was subsequently apparently picked up on RPGnet and Google+; ........................................ and Latorra was seen for what he was: an envious loser with an ideological agenda.

RPGPundit

Just a note - in reading that blog entry, there's a quote of yours from 24th December 2012.

That's some epic butt-hurt right there. :rotfl:  Update a 7 month-old blog entry with a 3 day-old quote.

Who does that?

Someone reading this thread and this site, i guess.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;611924You know what, I'll try and put this back on the rails: does Tunnels & Trolls fit anywhere on this master list?  yes, I know it's not "OSR" or "Retro" but you could argue it was the first attempt at replicating the D&D experience without specifically being D&D, and edition after edition has followed through the years (what is it now, 7th or 8th?).  I had the black box 5th edition and at a glance it seemed like a tongue-in-cheek take on Original D&D, but I didn't keep it long enough to really get in to it...

Absolutely.

On the same note, so does Palladium Fantasy RPG 1e.

What about Arduin?

Quote from: The Butcher;611966Absolutely.

On the same note, so does Palladium Fantasy RPG 1e.

What about Arduin?

Arduin was more of a supplement to than it's own game.  But, saying it's a "Supplement" to OD&D is a misnomer; Hargrave's out-there stuff is no more a "Supplement" to D&D than the awful "carcosa" "supplement".

Quote from: thedungeondelver;611982Arduin was more of a supplement to than it's own game.

But there is an Arduin RPG as well.

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-PCkYNTMex3Q/TsvzqKR2oEI/AAAAAAAAAUY/D1-R2StUoks/s320/arduin.JPG)

I don't know how much that one builds on the original supplemental material that was the Grimoires.

I wouldn't include T&T, or Arduin, any more than I would The Fantasy Trip, or Palladium, or Runequest, or Chivalry & Sorcery. I don't think it's relevant how closely any of these older games took mechanical inspiration from D&D, or whether any of them are still being published, or if they disappeared and came back as "clones" of themselves (arguably the case for RQ, or at least Chaosium BRP). Not even if they embody a notional "old school ethos". They're not "retro" and they're not "clones" of D&D.

This could be seen as pedantic nitpicking, but again, think about the function of the list. There are already lists of "all rpgs" (rpggeek, leGrog, John Kim's encyclopedia). What makes this list useful is that it's a one-stop shop for games that often aren't well-known because their titles don't have a long history, and a tool for disambiguating the variety of shades and colors.

Okay, arguably you put these titles into "old school but not retro clones [of D&D]", but so far that category is (again, usefully) limited to games which are at least consciously "retro", not games which are merely "old".

Quote from: purpleplatypus;611926Well, it does seem like an iffy, if not downright bad, PR move, not only for the obvious reasons, but also in contrast to the much more obvious names (Frank Mentzer jumps immediately to mind) who have said they're *not* involved.

Of course, shooting themselves in the ass PR-wise is entirely in character for WotC these days, so maybe I overrated those as reasons to be sceptical of your claim.

Except they didn't.  Most people who have even heard of me and dislike me are not D&D-fans anyways, and most people who have even heard of me and do agree with me (or dare I say, like me) are precisely the people who WoTC is trying to win back.

I know you want to live in a little fantasy world where everyone hates the Pundit as much as you do, but in fact, you don't get to have a highly successful blog, a vastly successful forum, and several successful RPGs... or for that matter, get hired by WoTC, if its not that you have a lot of people who appreciate your opinion.

RPGPundit

Quote from: The Butcher;611931...is this your idea of "aggressive"? Really?

Yes. Passive aggressive, if you want. But yes. No matter how politely or pretend-reasonable he sounds, what he did was issue a call to arms for people to mobilize to try to threaten WoTC into firing me. You might think that's odd of me, but I certainly consider that aggressive.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;612043I know you want to live in a little fantasy world where everyone hates the Pundit as much as you do

See, this is exactly the kind of egocentric, conspiracy-theory nonsense that people react so badly to. I don't like you, particularly, not that I expect you to care much, but you don't even come close to rating "hate". Anyone who would hate someone over something as petty as a dispute over RPGs suffers from a serious lack of perspective.

I'd argue that The Arduin Adventure, The Palladium Fantasy Roleplaying Game first edition, and Game Lords Theives Guild are all clearly D&D clones of the second variety.  True they dispense with Hit Dice and Vancian magic which are certainly part of what I see as the core game but so did fourth edition D&D...  And Skills and Powers did a broader attribute set and Unearthed Arcanna added Comliness as well, so I think there's room for them in the definition.

Yes they juggle the stat bonuses and damage ratings a bit but it's still d20 to hit with armor making you harder to hit, there's still saving throws and in Palladium1d6 damage per level fire balls.

The Arduin Adventure has fixed damage for weapons but that's just because it's a platform to add the Arduin Supplements on to.  Theives Guild is probably the closest to D&D but still lacks the Hit Dice mechanic at its heart.

I tend to fixate on the Hit Dice mechanic because it's the key wargame legacy trait that maps back to five man and ten man heroes and sets the one hit dice monster as equivalent to a regular infantry man.

Quote from: David Johansen;612240I'd argue that The Arduin Adventure, The Palladium Fantasy Roleplaying Game first edition, and Game Lords Theives Guild are all clearly D&D clones of the second variety.  True they dispense with Hit Dice and Vancian magic which are certainly part of what I see as the core game but so did fourth edition D&D...  And Skills and Powers did a broader attribute set and Unearthed Arcanna added Comliness as well, so I think there's room for them in the definition.

Clones maybe but how are they retro? The games you describe are all contemporaries of early edition D&D.

It's like saying Duran Duran are a retro 80s band...

Quote from: RPGPundit;611846Way back in April, when it became public I'd been hired as a consultant, he posted on his blog a call to boycott WoTC until they fired me, which was subsequently apparently picked up on RPGnet and Google+; like our friend platypus, he pretended that he totally had no stake in this issue and it had nothing to do with the fact that he's a storygamer with an agenda that he knows I oppose, and fears my potential influence might actually make D&D a palatable game again, and therefore make it harder for him to subvert it with utter shit like Dungeon World.

So yeah, the bitch literally tried to take food off my table with an attempt to get me fired.

Fortunately, it became obvious pretty quick that the people behind this business were the "will never play any edition of D&D anyways" crowd, to their threats not to buy WoTC product were fairly idle, and Latorra was seen for what he was: an envious loser with an ideological agenda.

RPGPundit

Quote from: thedungeondelver;611858Thanks for the info.  Yeah, that sound about par for the course for them.

A quick googling for those who are interested:

http://www.latorra.org/2012/04/05/swine-flew/

Google+ :

https://plus.google.com/101741476056657498230/posts/XFZZ2wdue4Y

Couldn't find an entry via google of anything at RPG.net.

Well. That's rich!

Quote from: RPGPundit;612044Yes. Passive aggressive, if you want. But yes. No matter how politely or pretend-reasonable he sounds, what he did was issue a call to arms for people to mobilize to try to threaten WoTC into firing me. You might think that's odd of me, but I certainly consider that aggressive.

RPGPundit

I don't dispute your right to hate each others' guts, but if you dislike Latorra's attitude, you might consider that the virulence of the Pundit persona (which I feel is typically a tad more "aggressive" than Latorra's wording of the boycott) isn't always conductive to rational debate, or inspiring respect in your philosophical opposition. Reap what you sow, and all that.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;611921well maybe we could cull off the posts that derailed and move them to the pundit's forum.

At this point it would probably be easier to start a new thread and leave this one to it. There are more off-topic posts now than on.

Quote from: The Butcher;612300the Pundit persona... isn't always conductive to rational debate, or inspiring respect in your philosophical opposition.

I don't know that it's very conducive to inspiring respect even in people who agree with him on most things.

Quote from: Fiasco;612251Clones maybe but how are they retro? The games you describe are all contemporaries of early edition D&D.

It's like saying Duran Duran are a retro 80s band...

Fair point, though, there's a secondary list that is for clones that are not specifically retro-clones.

Besides which, I don't think there's a single 'retro-clone' that didn't modify the version of D&D being cloned in some respect.

Quote from: purpleplatypus;612472I don't know that it's very conducive to inspiring respect even in people who agree with him on most things.

And yet, here I am, in spite of all the efforts of people like you.

RPGPundit

in case you haven't seen it yet, a flowchart of all editions and clones

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wilj4o0osxt53hw/D&D%20Family%20Tree.pdf

Hey, cool flowchart! Is it just me, or is Labyrinth Lord missing? I can see the LL Advanced Edition Companion, but LL itself should be spinning off from B/X.

I'm gratified to see Blueholme on there, even if DTRPG are still checking it out before listing it ...

Quote from: Joethelawyer;612680in case you haven't seen it yet, a flowchart of all editions and clones

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wilj4o0osxt53hw/D&D%20Family%20Tree.pdf

Marvellous.  I'd like to imagine that whoever created this used my list for inspiration.

Quote from: Vile;612811Hey, cool flowchart! Is it just me, or is Labyrinth Lord missing? I can see the LL Advanced Edition Companion, but LL itself should be spinning off from B/X.

It's there - it's up and to the left from B/X with a whole mess o'stuff branching off it.

Quote from: Warthur;612821It's there - it's up and to the left from B/X with a whole mess o'stuff branching off it.

Right, spotted it. I just have to say it again, this is a cool piece of work.

Kind of indicates how mammothly screwed the whole "If we go super-modular we can make everyone happy!" dream for D&D Next was.

It'd be interesting to see a version of the chart which highlights games which utilise the OGL. I think I would entitle that version "unintended consequences".

Quote from: Warthur;612937It'd be interesting to see a version of the chart which highlights games which utilise the OGL. I think I would entitle that version "unintended consequences".

That's not a flowchart.  That's a frickin' encyclopedia.

Also, does anybody know anything about Long Live the Magic Users and Fighting Men retroclone?  I can't seem to find it.

Added Wizards, Warriors, & Wyrms to the list!  Also added "Holmes" to the B/X, BECMI, and Rules Cyclopedia retroclones.  Holmes does not seem to be popular for cloning material, but he's one of the Basic guys.  Perhaps I should rename the section to "Basic D&D Retroclones?"

That's an amazing flow chart, heck it even got Dark Passages in there.

On the other hand, the OD&D set probably isn't the best place to put it.  The original version was somewhere between Holmes and AD&D with some influences from Castles and Crusades and Gamma World 1e.  The current version got second edition style class creation, 3rd edition single progression, and stat bonuses derived from the 3rd edition table.

Its amazing how much has been done; its unfortunate how much is just repetitive and mediocre (thought its also comprehensible), and what's really amazing is (potentially) how much more there is yet to do.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;613267Its amazing how much has been done; its unfortunate how much is just repetitive and mediocre (thought its also comprehensible), and what's really amazing is (potentially) how much more there is yet to do.

RPGPundit

I find this comment particularly bizarre. LoTFP (which you love) is little different to any of the others - just a tweak here and a tweak there. So to suggest the others are mediocre is disingenuous; each one has its own merits to people who prefer a particular element of old school style.

Quote from: Simon W;613295I find this comment particularly bizarre. LoTFP (which you love) is little different to any of the others - just a tweak here and a tweak there. So to suggest the others are mediocre is disingenuous; each one has its own merits to people who prefer a particular element of old school style.

I would argue that LotFP's changes are more significant than most would think but it only comes out in actual play. In any case I have time for a fair few retroclones.

Quote from: Simon W;613295I find this comment particularly bizarre. LoTFP (which you love) is little different to any of the others - just a tweak here and a tweak there. So to suggest the others are mediocre is disingenuous; each one has its own merits to people who prefer a particular element of old school style.

I disagree. I think that its an example of what should be done. I'm not suggesting radical changes; in fact, radical stuff is equally likely to be brilliant as it is to be mediocre.

Its just a fact that when you get a "boom", which the OSR very much is going through right now, there's going to be stuff that will be astounding and excellent, and a lot of stuff that will be so-so.

RPGPundit

They missed Conan D20, and they have Hackmaster as an offshoot of AD&D2, but Kenzer had the license for AD&D1, IIRC.

Quote from: CRKrueger;613392They missed Conan D20, and they have Hackmaster as an offshoot of AD&D2, but Kenzer had the license for AD&D1, IIRC.

What would Conan D20 be a retroclone of?

And you're right about hackmaster.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;613563What would Conan D20 be a retroclone of?

And you're right about hackmaster.

RPGPundit

The flow chart is just "D&D Family".

Okay, it's done - you can now add the BLUEHOLME Prentice Rules to the list! :)

http://dreamscapedesign.net/2013/01/10/blueholme-prentice-rules-go-live/

Quote from: Vile;616839Okay, it's done - you can now add the BLUEHOLME Prentice Rules to the list! :)

http://dreamscapedesign.net/2013/01/10/blueholme-prentice-rules-go-live/

Hooray!

Jesus fucking christ, do we really need another rulebook that "recreates" specific cover of the BD&D rules? What next? "Red Cover, 2nd Printing Adventures", recreating the vitally necessary distinction between the first and second printing of the Redbox D&D booklets?

I thought we were done with this bullshit.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;617273I thought we were done with this bullshit.

No, we're not. :rolleyes:

Quote from: Vile;617405No, we're not. :rolleyes:

And what makes you think its at all necessary?Why do a clone instead of a new take on old school?

RPGPundit

Added Dungeon Squad (http://www.1km1kt.net/rpg/dungeon-squad) to the list under "Old School but no Retro Clones."

Added the Big Brown Book (http://www.feysquare.com/the-big-brown-book) under Original D&D.

Updated Searcher of the Unknown under Other RPGs with this additional link. (http://www.retroroleplaying.com/content/searchers-unknown-rpg-collection)

Quote from: RPGPundit;617709And what makes you think its at all necessary?Why do a clone instead of a new take on old school?

What makes you think that necessity has anything to do with this stuff? Have you seen the length of that list in the first post? Who writes an RPG because it's needed?

Quote from: Libertad;617762Added Dungeon Squad (http://www.1km1kt.net/rpg/dungeon-squad) to the list under "Old School but no Retro Clones."

At this point I have to ask what in your mind is old school?

Dungeon Squad, upon a second viewing, comes off as an ultra-rules lite RPG than an Old School adaption.

Quote from: CRKrueger;617846At this point I have to ask what in your mind is old school?

Yeah, it might just be "erring on the side of permissiveness" but I'm starting to wonder that myself.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;618441Yeah, it might just be "erring on the side of permissiveness" but I'm starting to wonder that myself.

Maybe there are two different interpretations of the term "old school".

For some "old school" means everything that is modeled after stuff that was published from 74-88, for others the idea of entering a dungeon is "old school style play", regardless of actual rules. (And this explains why Dungeon World was nominated for this list as well.)

I really don't have my own definition of "old school" play beyond what I hear on AD&D sites and blogs, as I never got the chance to play pre-3rd Edition versions of the game; I'm pretty much going by examples listed on other websites (one of which listed Dungeon Squad as "Other").

When I first started some time ago, I was really excited by the idea of Old School games after checking out free samples of Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, etc, and searched the Internet for others.  I decided to make a list of them as a useful resource.

I ran into several complications on this front, as said earlier in this thread "the retroclone definition is in danger of death by a thousand cuts."  For example, Pathfinder is a 3rd Edition retroclone, but it's not necessarily what people think of "old school D&D."  And then there are RPGs which try to go for the "feel" of old school play but uses a different ruleset (not necessarily a retroclone).  Warrior, Rogue, & Mage goes by its own rules instead of aping a specific Edition or Set.

Instead of adhering to a specific interpretation, I'm trying to be inclusive, whether it's trying to mimic specific rules, a general "feel," or both.  Hopefully, I can make the list as useful as possible for interested viewers instead of going for a more restrictive route.

In that sense, this is less of a "Retroclone list" and more of a "D&D Emulator" list.

There's a pretty significant difference between 'a master list of D&D retro-clones' and 'a list of vaguely old-schoolish sounding games.'

Quote from: Libertad;618776In that sense, this is less of a "Retroclone list" and more of a "D&D Emulator" list.

I edited the thread title to be clearer on this point.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;618778There's a pretty significant difference between 'a master list of D&D retro-clones' and 'a list of vaguely old-schoolish sounding games.'

You forgot the "throwing old school as a buzzword while having nothing to do with actual old school games" category.

Lol I was about to edit the thread title but Benoist beat me to it.

I'm sorry for any confusion.  I'm not trying to use the term as a buzzword;  Dungeon Squad was a mistake to include.

I've otherwise been meticulous in trying to include games which emulated pre-4th Edition rulesets.

Quote from: Libertad;618788Lol I was about to edit the thread title but Benoist beat me to it.

I'm sorry for any confusion.  I'm not trying to use the term as a buzzword;  Dungeon Squad was a mistake to include.

To be clear my buzzword remark was targeted at games like 13th Age and Dungeon World. Not you. :)

Quote from: Libertad;618788I've otherwise been meticulous in trying to include games which emulated pre-4th Edition rulesets.

Yeah see that for me is a completely useless definition of old school, as far as my preferences in gaming are concerned. Anything pre-4th edition means pretty much anything under the Sun. It's really not helpful to me as a gamer. And what happens when D&D Next hits the shelves? 4th edition will be "old school" too? That's just ludicrous, to me.

Quote from: Benoist;618790Yeah see that for me is a completely useless definition of old school, as far as my preferences in gaming are concerned. Anything pre-4th edition means pretty much anything under the Sun. It's really not helpful to me as a gamer. And what happens when D&D Next hits the shelves? 4th edition will be "old school" too? That's just ludicrous, to me.

What is "Old School" is mostly a matter of time (3rd Edition came out in 2000, so it's "Old" to people who first got into D&D through 4E), but I see your point.

Many say that pre-3rd Edition is Old School, but in the consciousness of many gamers the term summons up specific definitions.  I think that 2nd Edition and before would be better definition, but I've seen some gamers decry 2nd as being "too exotic and gonzo" for things like Planescape and Dark Sun.  The majority of blogs and sites which discuss Old School do not often include 2nd Edition, with preferences heavily weighed towards Original, First Edition, and Basic Sets.

What time frame encompasses Old School to you?  This question is directed not just to Benoist, but to others as well.

Quote from: Libertad;618795What time frame encompasses Old School to you?  This question is directed not just to Benoist, but to others as well.

I consider everything released before AD&D 2e to be Old School. Or, everything published within (about) 10 years of the dawn of the hobby (OD&D). From the earliest edition, to its revision (various versions of BD&D up to AD&D), the public fadishness of the game through the early 80s, until the eventual decline as the 80s wore on.

I think a time-range from OD&D is an important point of measurement as "Old School". It's easy for someone's frame-of-reference to be shaped by their age, and when they were first introduced to the hobby. If you were 12 when 3.x was released, you might be inclined to call that "Old School". But I think that view is a little fallacious when you weigh it against the decades of RPG history that has come before you. Would someone like that consider 1E to be old, old school, and OD&D as super-fucking-old-old-school?

Quote from: Libertad;618795What time frame encompasses Old School to you?

Pre-Dragonlance.

Dragonlance was a watershed for a number of reasons, but to me it really marks the end of the era in which the wargamers dominated the hobby.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;618959Pre-Dragonlance.

This.

Pre-Dragonlance works for me. Conveniently it also puts us at the exact same place as "anything published within about 10 years of the dawn of the hobby" since OD&D was released in January 1974 and the first Dragonlance products were released in August 1984. A more personally-oriented definition (which I don't expect anyone else to accept, but it works pretty well for me) would also be "anything released before I started playing," which still puts us in the same place (March 1984) - even as a kid I always had the distinct impression that the Golden Age was ending and the new stuff being released wasn't the same (and wasn't as good) as what had come before. But luckily in those days you could still get ahold of old stuff (not the REALLY old stuff from the 70s, but the oldish stuff from the early 80s) pretty easily.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;618959Pre-Dragonlance.

Dragonlance was a watershed for a number of reasons, but to me it really marks the end of the era in which the wargamers dominated the hobby.

Quote from: Benoist;618962This.

Yes.  Although they might have been using the same rules set for a while after this, that rules set wasn't singing anymore.  It was a square peg being pushed through a round hole.

Pre Dragonlance?

So HERO is old school but GURPS isn't?

Anyhow, I've been calling Dark Passages a neo-clone or just a clone since I finished the current version.  The original was more of a Holmes Basic / Gamma World 1e clone while the current version is a little more 3e and 4e though it's still got some strong roots in AD&D.

I haven't done much of anything in the way of support.  There's a glut of OSR stuff anyhow.  I'm going to be running it for some kids at the store so I might get some work done on it.  Generally D&D isn't my thing ;)

I originally envisioned The Crucible and The Cauldron as a setting for Dark Passages but it doesn't really fit.  It's got more in common with "among the beautiful creatures" in terms of themes and style of play.  Besides, it's a deliberately offensive setting I mainly wrote to see if I could come up with something you couldn't possibly discuss on rpgnet without getting banned.  Maybe I'll write up some mechanics for it using poptarts and a box of steel wool for resolution.

Quote from: David Johansen;618982Pre Dragonlance?

So HERO is old school but GURPS isn't?

My impression is that Champions and The Fantasy Trip (both pre-DL) get a lot more love among self-identified old-schoolers than either the stand-alone HERO System or GURPS (both post-DL)

Quote from: David Johansen;618982Pre Dragonlance?

So HERO is old school but GURPS isn't?

I could buy that.  In some ways GURPS is struggling towards the same sort of emerging themes as Dragonlance (by giving build points for quirks, for example, to mechanically link role-playing and character power).  Not that this approach is necessarily bad -- there is a reason new school was very popular.

Quote from: David Johansen;618982Pre Dragonlance?

So HERO is old school but GURPS isn't?

'Not old-school' != 'storygame.'

I think GURPS is an example of what emerged in gaming as the wargamers diminished in numbers and influence.

Yeah. GURPS ain't old school to me, and I don't know HERO enough to have an opinion on the matter.

Quote from: EOTB;618981Yes.  Although they might have been using the same rules set for a while after this, that rules set wasn't singing anymore.  It was a square peg being pushed through a round hole.

I'm with you guys.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;618579Maybe there are two different interpretations of the term "old school".

For some "old school" means everything that is modeled after stuff that was published from 74-88, for others the idea of entering a dungeon is "old school style play", regardless of actual rules. (And this explains why Dungeon World was nominated for this list as well.)

There are two interpretations of "old school"; but the second one you offer is not either of them.

Your first definition (strictly modeled after rpgs published prior to a certain date) is correct; the other definition would be "rules and play that match the attitude of gameplay from that era".  By neither definition could you play "My Life With Master", enter a dungeon, and call it "old-school roleplaying" in spite of it not being either old-school nor roleplaying.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Libertad;618776I really don't have my own definition of "old school" play beyond what I hear on AD&D sites and blogs, as I never got the chance to play pre-3rd Edition versions of the game; I'm pretty much going by examples listed on other websites (one of which listed Dungeon Squad as "Other").

When I first started some time ago, I was really excited by the idea of Old School games after checking out free samples of Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, etc, and searched the Internet for others.  I decided to make a list of them as a useful resource.

I ran into several complications on this front, as said earlier in this thread "the retroclone definition is in danger of death by a thousand cuts."  For example, Pathfinder is a 3rd Edition retroclone, but it's not necessarily what people think of "old school D&D."  And then there are RPGs which try to go for the "feel" of old school play but uses a different ruleset (not necessarily a retroclone).  Warrior, Rogue, & Mage goes by its own rules instead of aping a specific Edition or Set.

Instead of adhering to a specific interpretation, I'm trying to be inclusive, whether it's trying to mimic specific rules, a general "feel," or both.  Hopefully, I can make the list as useful as possible for interested viewers instead of going for a more restrictive route.

In that sense, this is less of a "Retroclone list" and more of a "D&D Emulator" list.

But again, something like "dungeon world" is in no sense of the world a "retroclone".

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;619192But again, something like "dungeon world" is in no sense of the world a "retroclone".

RPGPundit

Nor is it by any stretch of the imagination "old school".  The whole X-World system is an attempt to build mostly traditional looking play through the use of defined mechanics to in essense force roleplaying from the perspective of the genre and tropes of a setting, not from immersion in the setting itself (and yes, that is a difference).

It's 100% narrative new school in that it uses mechanics to control the experience of the players to enforce literary emulation.

Is it a storygame?  Not as people usually define the term, no, but it sure as hell isn't traditional or old school.  It really is a new thing.

Quote from: Libertad;618795What time frame encompasses Old School to you?  This question is directed not just to Benoist, but to others as well.

I see two important factors in defining "old school":

• It has to relate in some way to the early days of the hobby;
• It can't approach role-playing from a detached or "meta" viewpoint.

The Pundit will be happy to know that, from my viewpoint, factor #2 means no storygame can ever be old school. Storygames are, by definition, very meta, with mechanics that relate directly to altering a storyline.

I see the time cut-off for actual old school games as the transition period from hobby press publishing to large-scale marketing. AD&D 1e and D&D Basic thus are technically old school (close to the original ruleset,) but the step up in production standards and the push to get the game in traditional toy stores and bookstores means that TSR starts taking into account marketing needs instead of just selling stuff the authors like. 2e again still has a recognizable old school skeleton, but the whole existence of 2e is based on a detached marketing analysis of the game.

Quote from: David Johansen;618982Pre Dragonlance?

So HERO is old school but GURPS isn't?

Can't speak for HERO, since I barely played it. But I played a lot of GURPS, and it definitely isn't old school. First, because it's a reboot of an older game, The Fantasy Trip, which Steve Jackson couldn't get the rights to when he left Metagaming.

Second, because even though it never had the kind of distribution that AD&D 2e had, it's obviously being designed to meet slicker marketing standards than the old TFT rules.

Third, I'd argue that any game that starts worrying more about "accurate" and "balanced" numbers, as opposed to just pretending to be fictional people in a fictional world, is departing from the more naive old school approach and is becoming more indirect, more detached, more meta. I'd actually apply this to HERO as well, and probably any generic ruleset.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;619140'Not old-school' != 'storygame.'

I think GURPS is an example of what emerged in gaming as the wargamers diminished in numbers and influence.

But...

GURPS combat is clearly a hex and counter era wargame...

Anyhow, my point was only that Dragonlance really isn't a good point of division as GURPS and HERO are as alike as two peas in a pod.  Which isn't surprising since TFT was a major inspiration for HERO and GURPS is TFT ramped up to the point of absurdity.

My own thoughts on "Old School" don't relate as much to play style.  I remember DMs who had stories and plots and characters and I remember DMs who ran the game like a board game.

1. Do it yourself.  Take what you like and leave the rest.  It is whatever you want it to be.

2. Concise and direct rules.

3. Long winded discussions of the "faults" of "other rpgs."

Quote from: David Johansen;618982Pre Dragonlance?

So HERO is old school but GURPS isn't?

IMO, GURPS is transitional. TFT is wonderfully old-school; GURPS 1e/2e is borderline; 3e, the most iconic version, isn't. TFT gets the nod for easy play, no angst, no questioning why you're adventuring, it's just what you do. Champions I don't know so well but 1e/2e were pretty slender and no-nonsense, no? I have Fantasy Hero 1e which I think is contemporary with Champs 3e; it reads kinda like GURPS 2e in that it has some complexity and of course "Disadvantages", but it's still straightforward about what you're doing.

QuoteI originally envisioned The Crucible and The Cauldron as a setting for Dark Passages but it doesn't really fit.  It's got more in common with "among the beautiful creatures" in terms of themes and style of play.  Besides, it's a deliberately offensive setting I mainly wrote to see if I could come up with something you couldn't possibly discuss on rpgnet without getting banned.  Maybe I'll write up some mechanics for it using poptarts and a box of steel wool for resolution.

I don't understand but it sounds nice. Those are kinda old-school in themselves.

Quote from: David Johansen;619378GURPS combat is clearly a hex and counter era wargame...

Hexes are a legacy of Melee/Wizard in GURPS. They don't make it 'old school' any more than 4e D&D's grids do.

GURPS is properly the terminus of the wave of simulationist games that grew out of C&S and RuneQuest.  It's a game obsessed with quantifying and comparing everything from a simulationist stand point.  It's hexes are nothing like D&D 4e's grid though the tactical play may seem similar at a glance.  In GURPS the grid is a tool for quantifying and structuring the simulation.  In D&D 4e the grid is a tool for tracking game effect advantages.  The place where this shows the most is that GURPS still plays beautifully without a grid because it's just a prop that helps to describe the action.  In D&D 4e the grid is an essential part of the function of the rules.  Or in other words, in GURPS you fit the action to the grid and in D&D 4e the action is dependant on the grid.

GURPS spends a page of the GM's chapter explaining why dungeon crawls are an immature and low grade form of roleplaying.  So probably not old school :D

Champions 2e was, in any case, mainly focused on combat and combat comparison.  The philosophical basis of the points is as such very different than GURPS and might be considered old school though Champions was always a do it our way game rather than one you customize to taste.

Quote from: RPGPundit;619189There are two interpretations of "old school"; but the second one you offer is not either of them.

Your first definition (strictly modeled after rpgs published prior to a certain date) is correct; the other definition would be "rules and play that match the attitude of gameplay from that era".  By neither definition could you play "My Life With Master", enter a dungeon, and call it "old-school roleplaying" in spite of it not being either old-school nor roleplaying.

There might be two interpretations of "old school" by old schoolers but what I wanted to say was that people from outside, not versed in true old school style play, think when they read "old school", and design for.

It's like story-metaplot-loving Das Schwarze Auge players who gleefully play Munchkin and really, honestly think that they have a parodistic, D&D-like experience that entitles them to mock D&D even more since they found their preconceptions about D&D confirmed.
(And who run Dungeonslayers in full-on dungeon mode and liking it, sometimes because they really like that style of play or sometimes because they revel in a self-conscious, deconstructionistic, postmodern "we-play-a-dungeon-game-the-way-we-think-a-dungeon-game-has-to-be-played" stance.)

I am not defending that view, I just wanted to explain why some people attach an Old School badge to Dungeon World and similar games. Some of them truly believe they are doing something old school-ish.
And most of the time there is not even an agenda behind it. Just a little misguidedness and/or lack of experience.

So yes, even I could see myself playing Dungeon World but I would play it in full-on old school mode, with DM rolling dice and nothing of the weird stuff; basically just using the beautiful character sheets and the skill/feats/class abilities.
(I wonder how long it takes until someone does an old school interpretation of the basic Dungeon World die-rolling/character class design system...)

Quote from: RPGPundit;619192But again, something like "dungeon world" is in no sense of the world a "retroclone".

Seconded.

GURPS is a paradox to me. While I don't consider it necessarily old-school. Its definitely not new school. At least not to me. Which I guess shows, if to no one else but me the subjectiveness of "Old school". I see people talk of grid with GURPS. But when ever I used it. I always followed the axiom of just using the rules I wanted/needed for my use. So I never used it. I view GURPS as a tool kit. Where the basic mechanic, system is well, very simple. Perhaps even old school. But it can be more complex the more you add to it. But, its not necessary. Which I suppose could really describe every role playing game from the start.

Swordsmen & Skeletons is an experiment.  It is a one page retroclone that if fully playable http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/177317/Swordsmen--Skeletons  Through clever minimizing, it gives you three character classes (playtested through tenth level), four character races, weapons and equipment, some 44 spells (priest and warlock) eighteen monsters with quick modifications, and rules for over 200 magic items, as well as encounter and treasure tables and rules for combat and adventure.

When it was pointed out to me that, to make it a real retroclone, it needed an OGL, we used the other side of that page to write up a play example as well.  This system was played for a year of real time from first level to a gotterdamerung completion of a campaign, and was enjoyed by all players.

Note that, like all retroclones, it has its personalizations.  Characters tend to be more powerful at low levels than with the original system, but death is nearly absolute, as is the case in most fantasy novels and legends.

I think Fantasy Craft would qualify as a "clone" in the "other category". It has some d20 3.x in there with new bits (albeit some tasty bits) in there.