Greetings,

Just discovered this forum today. I have read lightly the various retro-clone PDFs, and wanted some input from those more experienced with them.

The first RPG I played was 1E (only a couple of sessions). The first RPG book I bought was the 2E PHB. The thing that really made D&D appeal to me was that it was not like other games that used boards or playing pieces. It was sitting around the table with dice and "codices". It was all in your imagination, with no limitations (kinda like what is stated on the cover of the red box) -- completely unlike any other game . . . unlike a game, even . . . no winners, no end . . . etc.

I eventually moved on to 3E, thinking it would be just an update of the 2E. How wrong I was. Play started shifting to grids and physical representation. This killed it for me. 3.5 was even worse. 4E is . . . there's just no words for it. From where I sit, 2E and 3.xE/4E are different hobbies.

So, with that little bit of ranting out of the way, can anyone suggest to me, based on my past experiences, which direction I should more fully investigate?

[Um . . . the paladin was always my favourite character class . . . I don't know if that helps any.]

Maybe I need to create a 2E retro-clone?

Cheers, guys!

Quote from: 1989;316829Greetings,

Just discovered this forum today. I have read lightly the various retro-clone PDFs, and wanted some input from those more experienced with them.

The first RPG I played was 1E (only a couple of sessions). The first RPG book I bought was the 2E PHB. The thing that really made D&D appeal to me was that it was not like other games that used boards or playing pieces. It was sitting around the table with dice and "codices". It was all in your imagination, with no limitations (kinda like what is stated on the cover of the red box) -- completely like any other game . . . unlike a game, even . . . no winners, no end . . . etc.

I eventually moved on to 3E, thinking it would be just an update of the 2E. How wrong I was. Play started shifting to grids and physical representation. This killed it for me. 3.5 was even worse. 4E is . . . there's just no words for it. From where I sit, 2E and 3.xE/4E are different hobbies.

So, with that little bit of ranting out of the way, can anyone suggest to me, based on my past experiences, which direction I should more fully investigate?

[Um . . . the paladin was always my favourite character class . . . I don't know if that helps any.]

Maybe I need to create a 2E retro-clone?

Cheers, guys!

Or you could just keep playing 2e.  

Castles and Crusades

Quote from: Joethelawyer;316831Or you could just keep playing 2e.  

I could, but it's hard to get new people into the game when no rulebooks are easily available. The largest game store in Canada, the Sentry Box, has zero copies of 1E or 2E PHBs. I bought some used copies of 1E hardbacks, but I don't like the grubby feel of second-hand books. I photocopied them all, and put them into plastic sheets into a huge binder, instead.

Owning the books helps people feel more invested in the game, you know. At least, that's how I've seen it, in my limited experience.

Plus, I'd like to support the future. An in-print game at least has a chance for growth.

I haven't really played RPGs since 2000, or so. The OSR helps gamers take the old ways more seriously. Out-of-print = obsolete/inferior in a lot of gamers' minds. Newer is always seen as better.

I'll second the recommendation of Castles and Crusades. It's in-print, widely available, and about as close as you're going to get to 2E these days.

The books themselves aren't exactly pretty, but the system will be pretty familiar to you. And it doesn't require miniatures.

Castles & Crusades attempts to recreate a 1E feel with some 3E-isms, such as an ascending AC.

Quote from: ggroy;316834Castles and Crusades

I have Castles and Crusades, but it felt foreign, and not so old-school/familiar as I would have liked. That's too bad. If C&C could have been more like the retro-clones, it would have been like having AD&D back in print at the FLGS.

So far, I think OSRIC and Basic Fantasy do not mention miniatures. Can someone confirm that for me? LL, and S&W mention them briefly in passing.

I really like the light feeling of S&W (and the Old School primer really describes my philosophy of DMing), but the whole default alignment assumption (law vs. chaos, with good/evil being personal preference) that characters are neutral and out for fame and fortune (as opposed to the High Fantasy assumptions of good vs. evil) makes me wonder if I am suited for that game. I've never enjoyed playing in a company of morally neutral characters.

The fellow who made Microlite74 has stated that his ideal RPG is one without all the physical representation stuff, but the cover of PDF makes the game look a little bit comical/not serious??

Absolutely. You could keep playing 2nd edition. Don't let anybody tell you you'd have to go for a retroclone when you prefer an original.

What you'd want, should you choose to go the retroclone route, is a game that doesn't have a picky tactical combat system where minutia is involved, and de facto, visual representations will be strongly encouraged.

I think any of the current retroclones qualify in this regard, though the simpler the actual ruleset, the more free-wheeling the combat becomes, the less tactical it is in practice so... Swords & Wizardry would fit nicely here.

Now, if you want to go the route of actually creating a 2nd edition retroclone, you could start by downloading (for free) OSRIC (aka First Edition reloaded), then either take that as a template to create a 2nd edition retroclone, or (better IMO), create a supplement to OSRIC that basically makes key changes to the system for it to become a 2nd edition clone in effect.

Quote from: ggroy;316838Castles & Crusades attempts with recreate a 1E feel with some 3E-isms, such as an ascending AC.

my main complaint about C&C is probably the thing they pride themselves on the most, the siege system.  I know they say I can add anything to it I want to, but I don't want to buy a game so I can build up a new game around it.  I want it all in one books, with the kinks worked out.

I think what I'm mainly trying to get at here is that pretty much all retroclones are at least as good without miniatures as 2nd edition was. If you were comfortable with 2nd edition rules, you can pick your retroclone based on other criteria (such as "do I want rules light or rules heavy?" and such). You'll be fine.

Quote from: Joethelawyer;316844I want it all in one books, with the kinks worked out.

What would your "ideal" tabletop PnP rpg be?

Does anyone else share my dislike of the physical representation thing, or are players like me more of an anomaly? If there are people like me here on this board, which system(s) are you currently playing?

Quote from: 1989;316853Does anyone else share my dislike of the physical representation thing, or are players like me more of an anomaly? If there are people like me here on this board, which system(s) are you currently playing?

I'm agnostic either way with respect to the use of miniatures.

Usually I'll use miniatures if the players are the types who constantly argue about "I was here, not there".  For players of this type, less ambiguity makes the game run smoother and significantly cuts down on the arguments.

If players don't argue much about these sort of issues, I'm fine with DM'ing without miniatures.

Quote from: 1989;316853Does anyone else share my dislike of the physical representation thing, or are players like me more of an anomaly? If there are people like me here on this board, which system(s) are you currently playing?

When I was playing First ed, it was actually standard to not play with miniatures.
Playing with minis was an exception.

I personally switch between miniatures and no miniatures today. Depends what type of game play I want to go for (and the game obviously - I assume we're talking D&D exclusively, here).

Quote from: Benoist;316842Absolutely. You could keep playing 2nd edition. Don't let anybody tell you you'd have to go for a retroclone when you prefer an original.

What you'd want, should you choose to go the retroclone route, is a game that doesn't have a picky tactical combat system where minutia is involved, and de facto, visual representations will be strongly encouraged.

I think any of the current retroclones qualify in this regard, though the simpler the actual ruleset, the more free-wheeling the combat becomes, the less tactical it is in practice so... Swords & Wizardry would fit nicely here.

Now, if you want to go the route of actually creating a 2nd edition retroclone, you could start by downloading (for free) OSRIC (aka First Edition reloaded), then either take that as a template to create a 2nd edition retroclone, or (better IMO), create a supplement to OSRIC that basically makes key changes to the system for it to become a 2nd edition clone in effect.

I haven't played much 1E (only the very first few sessions in my life). I have the 1E hardbacks, but have not found anyone who wants to play. Concerning OSRIC/1E, what are the main differences between it and 2E?