|
|
Post by delta on May 21, 2021 8:44:03 GMT -6
Hey, we've got Matt Finch on our mostly-old-school D&D talk show this Sunday. If you don't know Matt, he's the creator of the award-winning Swords & Wizardry OD&D retroclone, author of the Quick Primer on Old School Gaming, and Creative Director at Frog God Games. (And he just produced a new adventure about a week ago, "Death Ship of the Roach Princess"). Our show airs Sunday at 1 PM ET on YouTube and Twitch, and we have live viewer chat running concurrently, from which we usually take a few questions.
Check out the links in the YouTube description if you want to see more of Matt's work. And feel free to post any questions in advance here, and I'll try to work them into our interview?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2021 15:04:20 GMT -6
I've always been curious why he made some of the omissions he did, like with Psionics or the slightly crunchier combat charts from the likes of Greyhawk and Blackmoor. I assume it's because he either doesn't like those rules or feels they don't fit the flavor of what he sees as OD&D, but it would be good to hear the thought process behind these omissions.
|
|
|
|
Post by delta on May 22, 2021 4:41:25 GMT -6
I've always been curious why he made some of the omissions he did, like with Psionics or the slightly crunchier combat charts from the likes of Greyhawk and Blackmoor. I assume it's because he either doesn't like those rules or feels they don't fit the flavor of what he sees as OD&D, but it would be good to hear the thought process behind these omissions. That's a good one! I feel like I could speculate (probably many of us could), but that's a great question for Matt. Adding it to my list now, thank you! |
|
|
|
Post by hakdov on May 22, 2021 14:32:37 GMT -6
I've always been curious why he made some of the omissions he did, like with Psionics or the slightly crunchier combat charts from the likes of Greyhawk and Blackmoor. I assume it's because he either doesn't like those rules or feels they don't fit the flavor of what he sees as OD&D, but it would be good to hear the thought process behind these omissions. Do any other OD&D clones include psionics or weapons vs armor rules? I don't think I've seen any. I have a feeling that because they weren't part of the d20 srd, publishers are scared to include them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2021 14:43:46 GMT -6
I've always been curious why he made some of the omissions he did, like with Psionics or the slightly crunchier combat charts from the likes of Greyhawk and Blackmoor. I assume it's because he either doesn't like those rules or feels they don't fit the flavor of what he sees as OD&D, but it would be good to hear the thought process behind these omissions. Do any other OD&D clones include psionics or weapons vs armor rules? I don't think I've seen any. I have a feeling that because they weren't part of the d20 srd, publishers are scared to include them. Maybe. I know Matt is a lawyer. He's quite savvy on what's allowed legally via the OGL. I look forward to hearing his input |
|
yesmar
Level 4 Theurgist
Fool, my spell book is written in Erlang!
Posts: 197
|
Post by yesmar on May 22, 2021 15:03:16 GMT -6
Do any other OD&D clones include psionics or weapons vs armor rules? I don't think I've seen any. I have a feeling that because they weren't part of the d20 srd, publishers are scared to include them. I can’t speak to simulacra because I game with the 3LBBs, but there are several commercial psionics supplements in OSR-land. A quick search turns up Old School Psionics and PX1 Basic Psionics Handbook, both of which were released under the OGL. There are also loads of home brew rules on the web, including simplifications, distillations, etc. There is no shortage of material if you like psionics. (For me, I am satisfied with the general mechanic of the Mind Flayer’s Mind Blast found in TSR vol. 1, no. 1.) |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on May 23, 2021 6:28:45 GMT -6
What are his top 5 DM tips?
|
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on May 23, 2021 6:33:03 GMT -6
Here’s a hypothetical situation for Mr. Finch: Old School DM is running a game of OD&D at a convention. There are 6 players who have signed up for the game. But they’ve only played 5th edition. How does the DM explain Original D&D to them before the game starts?
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on May 23, 2021 8:23:52 GMT -6
Why did he make the business decision to partner with Bill Webb on S&W Complete and create a line of modern/polished/expensive products to support it that are mostly conversions of 3.x/PF/5E materials?
|
|
|
|
Post by cadriel on May 23, 2021 9:02:33 GMT -6
I'd like to know what Matt thinks of the "Quick Primer" he did for the OSR and its impact on gaming since then.
|
|
|
|
Post by delta on May 23, 2021 9:13:37 GMT -6
Here’s a hypothetical situation for Mr. Finch: Old School DM is running a game of OD&D at a convention. There are 6 players who have signed up for the game. But they’ve only played 5th edition. How does the DM explain Original D&D to them before the game starts? Oh, I like that one a lot! |
|
|
|
Post by delta on May 23, 2021 9:16:48 GMT -6
I'd like to know what Matt thinks of the "Quick Primer" he did for the OSR and its impact on gaming since then. Definitely, this. I'm broadly aiming to spend as much as half the interview today on that, specifically. (We'll see, all of our battle plans last right up until start of an interview.) |
|
|
|
Post by bigjackbrass on May 23, 2021 10:41:43 GMT -6
Our show airs Sunday at 1 PM ET on YouTube and Twitch… Is there a podcast (i.e. audio rather than video) feed for your show? I've tried listening to shows on YouTube before, but since they stop playing when the screen isn't on it's not terribly practical. |
|
yesmar
Level 4 Theurgist
Fool, my spell book is written in Erlang!
Posts: 197
|
Post by yesmar on May 23, 2021 11:33:34 GMT -6
Our show airs Sunday at 1 PM ET on YouTube and Twitch… Is there a podcast (i.e. audio rather than video) feed for your show? I've tried listening to shows on YouTube before, but since they stop playing when the screen isn't on it's not terribly practical. There is an audio only version I believe, but it lags behind the YouTube. A quick solution would be to use the excellent youtube-dl to snag the audio for a given episode. Easy peasy. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjackbrass on May 23, 2021 15:11:35 GMT -6
Thanks, I'll look into that.
|
|
|
|
Post by cadriel on May 24, 2021 7:20:09 GMT -6
So, I got to watch this. I think Matt handled himself well on the question of the Quick Primer - which made sense in its time but comes off as a bit too punchy today, when some of its ideas are lurking in the official D&D rulebooks.
I'd have pushed back somewhat on Swords & Wizardry being as close to OD&D as Matt says. It's got a lot of the spirit, and in practice you could run a pretty similar game, but there are tons of details that aren't that similar. It basically omits the large majority of volume 3 of OD&D, and reworks things from stat bonuses to saving throws. Delving Deeper is a much more faithful clone. I see it as similar to Basic Fantasy and Labyrinth Lord - one is more of a spiritual cousin, the other an attempt to reproduce directly. This isn't a knock on S&W at all; I think it's a fine game, and one of the better clones overall - in no small part because of these very departures. I just think it needs the caveat that it's got a number of idiosyncrasies relative to OD&D.
|
|
|
|
Post by cadriel on May 24, 2021 14:45:19 GMT -6
I actually wanted to check one of my claims above and looked into my copies of S&W. It looks like what I said was basically true of the original S&W - the first version basically had almost no content from The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures. But it looks like it's inconsistent across different versions of S&W. S&W WhiteBox follows the first printing - it doesn't even have rules for listening at doors. White Box FMAG adds these back into the rules. So does S&W Core in the 4th printing, which also has rules for mass combat that were missing in prior printings. S&W Complete has all of that as well as aerial and naval combat rules fairly close to those in U&WA.
None of them seem to have an analog for OD&D's rules around castles (either as encounters or construction), or various rules like upkeep, baronies, and so on. And of course, S&W has large-scale changes from book 3 with regard to treasure generation. What's most ironic is that S&W Complete comes closest to covering the same ground as the LBBs, but it also has the most additional stuff from other sources. S&W WhiteBox, on the other hand, has very little from U&WA at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by delta on May 28, 2021 8:53:34 GMT -6
Our show airs Sunday at 1 PM ET on YouTube and Twitch… Is there a podcast (i.e. audio rather than video) feed for your show? I've tried listening to shows on YouTube before, but since they stop playing when the screen isn't on it's not terribly practical. Great ask, thanks for that. yesmar is correct: We release audio-podcast versions of our shows at wanderingdms.com (or standard podcast providers). My partner Paul does that manually when he gets a chance, usually about a week later. Hopefully the Matt Finch interview gets up in the next few days. |
|
|
|
Post by delta on May 28, 2021 9:05:57 GMT -6
So, I got to watch this. I think Matt handled himself well on the question of the Quick Primer - which made sense in its time but comes off as a bit too punchy today, when some of its ideas are lurking in the official D&D rulebooks. I'd have pushed back somewhat on Swords & Wizardry being as close to OD&D as Matt says. It's got a lot of the spirit, and in practice you could run a pretty similar game, but there are tons of details that aren't that similar. It basically omits the large majority of volume 3 of OD&D, and reworks things from stat bonuses to saving throws. Delving Deeper is a much more faithful clone. I see it as similar to Basic Fantasy and Labyrinth Lord - one is more of a spiritual cousin, the other an attempt to reproduce directly. This isn't a knock on S&W at all; I think it's a fine game, and one of the better clones overall - in no small part because of these very departures. I just think it needs the caveat that it's got a number of idiosyncrasies relative to OD&D. That's an excellent point, I think -- and thanks for the follow-up research. Likewise, I was researching some stuff in more detail in the days after the show. One thing I realized is that I'm always using the S&W Core Rules (2nd print) as my resource, and when Matt got into issues about the Ranger, Illusionist, etc., in the Complete Rules, I realized that I wasn't sufficiently informed to hold up a good conversation on that end. Hopefully in a follow-up visit we could address that more directly. In particular, I'd like to ask about the status of Swords & Spells (which arguably massages some issues in OD&D around initiative, spell descriptors, hit chances, level-0 characters, etc.) in his "right before AD&D" perspective. Also I'll say we chatted after the show a little about mass combat for OD&D. More on that later, I hope. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2021 9:22:53 GMT -6
I think you pushed him just enough to maintain the amicable atmosphere an interview like this ought to have. After all, he's a content-creator in an elf game hobby, not a politician or a guy who hurt a bunch of children or something. Hard-ball questions and grilling maybe aren't thematically on-point as much in a situation like this. You pushed him enough in general terms and his explanations, while maybe falling short of admitting exaggeration, do carry the spirit of Swords & Wizardry about them.
I will admit that one of the comments you fielded to him seems to have been lost in translation, though. Jeffb wasn't talking about the Swords & Wizardry rules set being 3e, but the fact that FGG repackages a lot of their adventures for 3e/Pathfinder/5e as S&W adventures. At least that's how I read it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on May 28, 2021 11:27:31 GMT -6
I think you pushed him just enough to maintain the amicable atmosphere an interview like this ought to have. After all, he's a content-creator in an elf game hobby, not a politician or a guy who hurt a bunch of children or something. Hard-ball questions and grilling maybe aren't thematically on-point as much in a situation like this. You pushed him enough in general terms and his explanations, while maybe falling short of admitting exaggeration, do carry the spirit of Swords & Wizardry about them. I will admit that one of the comments you fielded to him seems to have been lost in translation, though. Jeffb wasn't talking about the Swords & Wizardry rules set being 3e, but the fact that FGG repackages a lot of their adventures for 3e/Pathfinder/5e as S&W adventures. At least that's how I read it. I've not watched the interview, yet. Hoping to do so this weekend. But yes, that is the gist- Most of the content for S&W from FGG has been material that was previously done in 3E (Rappan Athuk and Tome of Horros ad nauseum), or just conversions of PF/5E specific designs that have funded on KS and IGG. Certainly there are a few things that were S&W exclusives first or published prior to FGG by Matt (monstrosities), but S&W has become the "redheaded step-child" of FGG-seemingly added on the KS projects as an afterthought..." oh yeah, we'll convert this to S&W too" Most of these adventures are designed with PF/5E audience in mind, and that is a completely different design and playstyle mindset than S&W/OD&D is. Between this and the debacle that was S&W Complete 3rd print, I gave up on FGG. So disappointing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2021 14:17:08 GMT -6
I think you pushed him just enough to maintain the amicable atmosphere an interview like this ought to have. After all, he's a content-creator in an elf game hobby, not a politician or a guy who hurt a bunch of children or something. Hard-ball questions and grilling maybe aren't thematically on-point as much in a situation like this. You pushed him enough in general terms and his explanations, while maybe falling short of admitting exaggeration, do carry the spirit of Swords & Wizardry about them. I will admit that one of the comments you fielded to him seems to have been lost in translation, though. Jeffb wasn't talking about the Swords & Wizardry rules set being 3e, but the fact that FGG repackages a lot of their adventures for 3e/Pathfinder/5e as S&W adventures. At least that's how I read it. I've not watched the interview, yet. Hoping to do so this weekend. But yes, that is the gist- Most of the content for S&W from FGG has been material that was previously done in 3E (Rappan Athuk and Tome of Horros ad nauseum), or just conversions of PF/5E specific designs that have funded on KS and IGG. Certainly there are a few things that were S&W exclusives first or published prior to FGG by Matt (monstrosities), but S&W has become the "redheaded step-child" of FGG-seemingly added on the KS projects as an afterthought..." oh yeah, we'll convert this to S&W too" Most of these adventures are designed with PF/5E audience in mind, and that is a completely different design and playstyle mindset than S&W/OD&D is. Between this and the debacle that was S&W Complete 3rd print, I gave up on FGG. So disappointing. It's a little sad to me to see them adopt this business model, too, because it's clear that the OD&D style game is where Matt and some of the other people in the company really want to be, but they know what sells and keeps them profitable and that's what gets printed. That's probably not an easy choice for a company to make. It's like Goodman Games with DCC and their 5e conversions of classic modules. I think GG strike a better balance though. Yeah...I almost backed the box set Kickstarter for S&W but something about the company just puts me off any more. I think it's this aspect and a few other quibbles over the years. It's a shame because it really is the most widely known and readily accessible OD&D clone on the market. |
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on May 28, 2021 20:44:38 GMT -6
and that is a completely different design and playstyle mindset than S&W/OD&D is. Yeah, that seems to me a pretty important observation. Bing. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on May 29, 2021 7:56:24 GMT -6
and that is a completely different design and playstyle mindset than S&W/OD&D is. Yeah, that seems to me a pretty important observation. Bing. I'll be the first one to say "there is no one style" of OD&D. As I've stated ad nauseum, we didn't play like the Mid West crowd at all. But even if we take out the "fictional" variances between OD&D/S&W and 4E/5E/PF- mechanically it still requires you to approach writing the adventure in a very different way. general commentary: To be fair , I'm thankful for Bill & Matt for what they did do with S&W initially, whether Matt on his own or later with Bill. I was an early proponent of original S&W (I think I was reviewing/praising it all over various forums at the time), Whitebox (thanks Marv!) and I had a great exchange with Bill when the first edition of Complete was getting ready to ship- right around the time the limited # of copies was supposed to go out, I was having my initial back surgery and would be recovering over several weeks. He was kind enough to set aside a copy for me until I could get back on a computer and get him paid. I also have some products from them like Tomb of the Iron God and The Black Monastery, that I adore. They offered up these rules for free for everyone. And I certainly hold no grudge against anyone embracing Capitalism  I just feel they have lost the plot when it comes to S&W. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on May 30, 2021 9:01:53 GMT -6
I will admit that one of the comments you fielded to him seems to have been lost in translation, though. Jeffb wasn't talking about the Swords & Wizardry rules set being 3e, but the fact that FGG repackages a lot of their adventures for 3e/Pathfinder/5e as S&W adventures. At least that's how I read it. OK, yeah I'm watching now, and that's completely NOT what I was asking and not sure how anyone could have taken it that way, but... :shrug: |
|
I just feel they have lost the plot when it comes to S&W.