This is just the Players' Section. The GM section will be finished in a few days with the monsters and treasure. Pete Mullen is doing the cover artwork.
What I've posted is still a draft. I figured that in this case I'd bring the net community in early to give comments and edits.
This is less of a "clone" than OSRIC was, because I'm shooting for a "rosetta stone" effect as well.
In the following week, I'll provide a lot more information on what's going to be done with this project - I intend to support it with a pdf magazine.
License features: All OGL except trademarks "S&W," "Swords & Wizardry," "Mythmere Games," and "Flip-AC System."
WP document will be released to allow cut and paste; house rules campaigns created with cut and paste can be posted and even sold.
Major Differences: Base 10 AC Variations in xp tables One saving throw Mix of material from supplements but still only 3 classes Variation in "to-hit" progressions To-hit is a formula, but I'll add the full table in appendices.
Re: White Box (and some Supp) Retro Clone « Reply #1 on Jun 3, 2008, 9:20pm »
Base 10 AC? I am not sure what you mean here. Are you saying "no armor" and/or "shield" i.e. skin is AC 10 instead of AC 9? Is this meant to be a brand new game since you say less a clone than OSRIC?
« Last Edit: Jun 3, 2008, 9:22pm by crimhthanthegreat »
Base 10 AC? I am not sure what you mean here. Are you saying "no armor" and/or "shield" i.e. skin is AC 10 instead of AC 9? Is this meant to be a brand new game since you say less a clone than OSRIC?
Yes, skin is 10AC, not 9.
No, it's not a new game, depending on where you think one game "separates" from another. What I mean by less of a clone than OSRIC is that there are one or two larger variations - namely the use of a base 10 AC, single saving throw category, etc. OSRIC didn't have any divergences quite that big from 1e.
For people already playing using the white box or supplements, the only value of a retro-clone is in the articles, modules, etc that it spawns - the secondary material. The presentation in those materials should be indistinguishable and thus completely usable without a hitch.
And look at it this way - anyone using even a fraction of the Arduin Grimoire is playing something much further removed from the White Box than Swords & Wizardry.
From a very quick glance through the pages, it looks interesting. I'm very happy to see retro-clones of the original game coming out. I just mentioned Swords & Wizardry in my blog as coming soon.
Finarvyn Administrator Dungeon Master member is offline
Joined: Jun 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 4,676 Location: Near Chicago Karma: 178
Re: White Box (and some Supp) Retro Clone « Reply #4 on Jun 3, 2008, 10:15pm »
I've only skimmed it, but Swords & Wizardry looks interesting so far. I'm not entirely sure how you combine White Box with Basic since they have a few variantions between them, but it might work. Can I assume that "Basic" means Holmes?
Thoughts, more-or-less at random: (From a skim, so I may have missed something obvious) 1. Ability scores below 3 but not above 18 seem a little odd. Do you see many uses for stat values of 1 or 2? 2. Flip-10 (dual AC numbers) is nice, although I'm sure somebody will hate it. 3. I noticed that 1st level Clerics get spells. Not so in the White Box. Also, Cleric bonus spells -- is that a Greyhawk thing? I'm having a brain cramp but I don't recall these numbers in White Box or Holmes. 4. Saving Throw -- is this a single number for all saves? 5. Hit Dice -- the d10 for the fighter (for example) is kind of AD&D-ish. Is it your intent to blend several versions together? Magic user = d6 an interesting house rule, but not one of the editions you quote from. 6. I'm not sure if I like the dual attack roll charts. 7. I notice that demi-human level limits are removed. That will spark some discussion. 8. I kind of like the "turn undead" chart in d20 form rather than 2d6.
I like what you've done overall, but I guess I'm not entirely certain if this is really supposed to represent OGL OD&D or a nifty house rules set. Either way is fine, but I'm just a little confused.
Marv / Finarvyn DCC playtester (2011) C&C playtester (2003) I'm partly responsible for the S&W WhiteBox Builder of the TrollBridge Master of Mutants; MA since 1976 OD&D Player since 1975
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" - Dave Arneson
I've only skimmed it, but Swords & Wizardry looks interesting so far. I'm not entirely sure how you combine White Box with Basic since they have a few variantions between them, but it might work. Can I assume that "Basic" means Holmes?
Thoughts, more-or-less at random: (From a skim, so I may have missed something obvious) 1. Ability scores below 3 but not above 18 seem a little odd. Do you see many uses for stat values of 1 or 2?
Nope - that's a bust. I'll change that.
Quote:
2. Flip-10 (dual AC numbers) is nice, although I'm sure somebody will hate it.
That's where I expect most of the hate and threat-mail to come from. Fortunately, after all the OSRIC hate mail, I've gotten thicker skinned.
Quote:
3. I noticed that 1st level Clerics get spells. Not so in the White Box. Also, Cleric bonus spells -- is that a Greyhawk thing? I'm having a brain cramp but I don't recall these numbers in White Box or Holmes.
I can't recall whether clerics had spells at first level in Holmes, but bonus cleric spells are definitely not white box. That's in there for a rosetta stone effect with the "advanced" games: I'm not just trying to hit the white box, I'm trying to create a baseline clone/simulacrum whose resources will work with almost any edition. Anyone who plays with the original rules (not using the S&W rulebook) reading a module/resource based on S&W will find NPC clerics with more spells than normal, or if the module doesn't say how many spells the cleric has, it won't be visible - you'll just check the actual white box you're using and never know the difference. It's normal for NPCs to have odd numbers of spells or strange abilities, so there's no jarring effect to that.
Quote:
4. Saving Throw -- is this a single number for all saves?
Yes.
Quote:
5. Hit Dice -- the d10 for the fighter (for example) is kind of AD&D-ish. Is it your intent to blend several versions together? Magic user = d6 an interesting house rule, but not one of the editions you quote from.
Yes, versions are blended. I thought the variation in HD type came from the supplements and that everyone had a d6 in the original? Did we play it wrong?
Quote:
6. I'm not sure if I like the dual attack roll charts.
There will be a full table for the standard progression in the appendices. For normal AC, I like to see a full table. I just didn't want to reproduce the table for each character class in the middle of the description. Might not be a bad idea, though. You need to have dual to hit systems in order to have the ascending/descending AC stats, though.
Quote:
7. I notice that demi-human level limits are removed. That will spark some discussion.
Yeah, it always does.
Quote:
8. I kind of like the "turn undead" chart in d20 form rather than 2d6.
Thanks!
Quote:
I like what you've done overall, but I guess I'm not entirely certain if this is really supposed to represent OGL OD&D or a nifty house rules set. Either way is fine, but I'm just a little confused.
For the purpose of this board, it's neither. It's a publishing vehicle to set up an OGL source for creating resources. Unlike the way we worked OSRIC, I'm going to actively support it. What we learned from OSRIC is that most people with material won't go to the trouble of self-publishing. You need a vehicle to bring in the small essays, module ideas, and other small-scale material - and you need a third party to put together artwork, layout and writing. Part of my plan for OSRIC was that the ability to charge for something would defray costs, allowing an author to find a professional artist and work together. That doesn't happen the way I thought it would.
I got a bit off topic there - the point being, no one at this board is going to pick this up and use it. It's too close to the original to be a new game, but it's too far away to be a substitute rulebook. It's useful because of the potential for new material.
I'm probably going to do the support as a "magazine" - a counterpart to Fight On!, only for the OGL retro-clones. OGL material can't be in a magazine that uses non-OGL material, and vice versa. So unless there's going to be a lot of potential lost, there has to be an OGL counterpart to Fight On!.
I'm probably going to do the support as a "magazine" - a counterpart to Fight On!, only for the OGL retro-clones. OGL material can't be in a magazine that uses non-OGL material, and vice versa. So unless there's going to be a lot of potential lost, there has to be an OGL counterpart to Fight On!.
I'm slowly working my way through purchasing all the published OSRIC and LL material and I'm delighted with Fight On!, so if you go ahead with this project Matt, I'll happily purchase this too.
I was thinking about the subject of a retro-clone OD&D last week and thought it would be great to have a rule book with blank columns in all the charts. Assuming the clone has to make changes to the numbers to prevent it being an exact copy of the original, this would enable the user to write in the numbers he wants (i.e. the originals), crossing out the clone numbers and voila! - the original rules in a neat and tidy, easy to read format.
In the meantime, having only given the document a quick once-over, I like what you've done so far.
Finarvyn Administrator Dungeon Master member is offline
Joined: Jun 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 4,676 Location: Near Chicago Karma: 178
Re: White Box (and some Supp) Retro Clone « Reply #8 on Jun 4, 2008, 8:30am »
mythmere, I was just confused and not trying to be overly critical.
As far as HD goes, all characters were d6 in the LBB but magic users were downgraded to d4 when fighters were boosted to d8, which is why I commented on the "house rule" aspect -- it's not qute one or the other system, but a blend.
Nice work, overall. I'll spend even more time reading it today.
Marv / Finarvyn DCC playtester (2011) C&C playtester (2003) I'm partly responsible for the S&W WhiteBox Builder of the TrollBridge Master of Mutants; MA since 1976 OD&D Player since 1975
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" - Dave Arneson
Can I copy and paste them into my own version of D&D? That would save me lots of work!
Yes, you can. Or at least, once the draft is finalized (say, a month?) I'll "activate" the licenses and also release a word-processing document to make it easier for cutting and pasting. You'll even be licensed to sell your version if you want to.
Joined: May 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 293 Karma: 21
Re: White Box (and some Supp) Retro Clone « Reply #10 on Jun 4, 2008, 9:31am »
Fin, I didn't take your remarks as critical - it is very hard to take one of these things and x-ray it for the bones and muscles underneath. Especially when the author's trying to hit a middle ground between a couple of goals.
There's the legal goal of not violating WotC's copyright IP: in this case I'm incontrovertibly firm ground with the single saving throw the MU's d6 hit die, etc., etc.
Then there's the "intro to this game for new players" side (this was an unexpectedly common use of OSRIC - better than I'd hoped for). Here, the same things that give the document legal strength are weaknesses. Someone introduced to the White Box with this game is likely to think that one saving throw category is the RULE, not an adjustment. Since we're talking 0e here, I think that's not a huge problem. If someone takes from my rules the idea that you couldn't play WITH saving throw categories, then I failed to get across the whole point of 0e to that person. 0e isn't about the exact rules, it's about flexibility.
Then there's the high-compatibility side. As a matter of complete selfishness, what I miss about the old days is the lightning-like creativity of Dragon Magazine and White Dwarf articles, which declined and declined and declined as the games became more specific and rules-bound. By cutting back to the basic elements, I'm hoping to see that "imagine the hell out of it" attitude emerge in whatever gets published under the S&W umbrella. In order to get enough people writing and reading those materials, however, the results have to be seen as "compatible" with various different games. Take Labyrinth Lord, for example. Materials from S&W are going to be compatible (partly because of that sacrifice to the base 10 AC). Anyone with a 0e idea can publish it using S&W, and expect to pick up readers who play Labyrinth Lord. This requires a little bit of toggling - adding the ascending AC numbers is obviously in service of this compatibility goal (Solomoriah's game and the Chenault brothers' game both use ascending AC).
So, yes - it is very hard to take a look at a retro-clone (or simulacrum game, or something in between) and figure out where all those factors have been balanced in. I don't take offense at questions at all.
Joined: Jan 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 2,330 Location: New Hope, MN Karma: 93
Re: White Box (and some Supp) Retro Clone « Reply #11 on Jun 4, 2008, 1:31pm »
Quote:
I was thinking about the subject of a retro-clone OD&D last week and thought it would be great to have a rule book with blank columns in all the charts. Assuming the clone has to make changes to the numbers to prevent it being an exact copy of the original, this would enable the user to write in the numbers he wants (i.e. the originals), crossing out the clone numbers and voila! - the original rules in a neat and tidy, easy to read format.
calithena Moderator Official "Fight On!" Scribe member is offline
Will Withstand Adversity
Joined: Jul 2007 Posts: 2,699 Karma: 91
Re: White Box (and some Supp) Retro Clone « Reply #12 on Jun 4, 2008, 1:55pm »
Nearly all the material in Fight On!, though not OGL, is directly gamable within Swords and Wizardry and all the other OGL retro-clones. So we are supporting those games with content, and we can also give them props by name. The only thing we currently aren't doing is printing specific names of specific games with specific articles and saying 'x is for y', since that would force us to use the OGL (I think).
I think it's great to have more stuff for the old games out there and this ruleset looks pretty cool. Happily, people playing S&W and the other retro-clones will be able to use Fight On! to supplement their play, as well as whatever else is published.
I was thinking about the subject of a retro-clone OD&D last week and thought it would be great to have a rule book with blank columns in all the charts. Assuming the clone has to make changes to the numbers to prevent it being an exact copy of the original, this would enable the user to write in the numbers he wants (i.e. the originals), crossing out the clone numbers and voila! - the original rules in a neat and tidy, easy to read format.
That is an excellent, excellent idea...
Hmm. Layout issues ... but I see what you mean. What we COULD do is to put one up on POD with nothing BUT blank columns and call it the "Tinkerer's" version or something. I mean, no numbers at all anywhere in the book. Or maybe do them in like 4 point font, leaving room for the "real" number to be written in - but the reader still knows what the original was...
Keep in mind that we'll be releasing a WP document so that cutting and pasting's already do-able ... but then you've got to do your own layout, so I see why that might not be so great for lots of people.
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
![[avatar]](http://jachilli.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/swfinalcover.jpg "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
Logged
![[avatar]](http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/finarvyn/avatar.jpg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}
![[avatar]](http://www.freeyabb.com/trolllordgames/images/avatars/trolllordgames/49541430946ca706f3ab62.gif "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii55/akesher3/erolaxeAvatar.jpg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}
![[avatar]](http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d164/Calithena/FightOn1Cover.jpg "[avatar]")
