Blogpost with analysis of number of OSR-clones per edition

[ahabicher]

An interesting analysis.
I am not sure about the scientific validity of the method, and the quality of the source material,
but it is food for thought nevertheless.

bxbandits.substack.com/p/the-beating-heart-of-the-osr

Spoiler Alert: 
B/X and Original D&D are clear in front, Original is found numerical winner.

[Falconer]

Yeah, slightly interesting to consider, but I’m not sure it’s such a useful way to define dominance. Consider AD&D 1e, a ruleset that has only one clone of its “core,” but they did a super job on it, which has invited hundreds of excellent modules and supplements.

I would also say that most clones of OD&D or B/X, you can’t particularly tell whether it is supposed to be a clone of OD&D or B/X, because the rewrite necessarily smooths over some of the things that make OD&D and B/X distinct from one another. There are exceptions which attempt to be more rigorous.

[ahabicher]

Agreed. The article even claims that The Black Hack is based on OD&D, and it might be true, but reading the rules there is very little left of that basis. Or at least, twisted beyond recognition.

Even so, the basis is some list, which may be complete or not, and this first analysis is for pure number of games existing, regardless of their success with players, a benchmark that is doubtful in its value.

[derv]

It is interesting to consider. Also, the sheer weight of material that has been put forth is something to behold (realizing the list is far from exhaustive).

Really there is very little in the way of being able to substantiate any of the claims. What are the criteria for being considered a clone of x, y, or z? Ask five different people, you'll get five different answers. "Inspired by" is a very different thing then an intentional close facsimile. It appears he is basing his findings on how his two sources have categorized each rule set. How did his sources arrive at those decisions?

I doubt the author has even marginally reviewed each of the rule sets. That would be quite the task. Throwing clones of clones (that claim to be x, y, or z) into the mix only further distorts the outcome.

Unfortunately, the author has not successfully debunked the idea of BX's influence, as he sought to do. He would need to be a little more rigorous with his research to achieve that.

[Falconer]

OD&D is a limited toolbox only because they had to start somewhere. It presents itself as the gateway to limitless possibilities. Historically it led to Traveller and RuneQuest and AD&D and everything.

B/X is limited by design. It says, OD&D (with some rough edges smoothed) is the perfect game just as it is.

I only bring this up because it’s one way to explain the phenomenon the blogger is looking at. B/X clones don’t tend to fall far from the tree, because B/X is the perfect game. Whereas OD&D clones tend to strike out in new directions or expand on some niche. B/X clones rebuild B/X-land, but OD&D clones take you to Mars. Because that’s exactly what OD&D invited you to do.

I paint, of course, with a broad brush.

[dukeofchutney]

Feb 8, 2022 22:11:47 GMT -6 Falconer said:

OD&D is a limited toolbox only because they had to start somewhere. It presents itself as the gateway to limitless possibilities. Historically it led to Traveller and RuneQuest and AD&D and everything.

B/X is limited by design. It says, OD&D (with some rough edges smoothed) is the perfect game just as it is.

I only bring this up because it’s one way to explain the phenomenon the blogger is looking at. B/X clones don’t tend to fall far from the tree, because B/X is the perfect game. Whereas OD&D clones tend to strike out in new directions or expand on some niche. B/X clones rebuild B/X-land, but OD&D clones take you to Mars. Because that’s exactly what OD&D invited you to do.

I paint, of course, with a broad brush.

Perhaps but games like DCC do use BX as their basis but modify the material. BFRP and LoFP also diverge from BX.

I think it is less to do with the original games and more to do with trends over time in the OSR. Ten years ago the the trend was older guys influenced by the games they first played. For a lot that was BX. The clone of clones is driven by something else. This is younger people who saw systems like SW white box as a super simple alternative to modern DND. They took that super simple mindset and built their own games from it. Games like Whitehack and Blackhack spawned a wave of systems. Whether their root is 0dnd or BX may have been different if the most stripped down clone on the market circa 2015 had a different origin.

[Finarvyn]

Well, also keep in mind also that technically all of the clones are based on 3E since that's the SRD source document they all pull their rules from. I know that each clone may be slanted towards one philosophy or another, but they all come from that same SRD.

[derv]

Feb 8, 2022 22:11:47 GMT -6 Falconer said:

I only bring this up because it’s one way to explain the phenomenon the blogger is looking at.

Sure, if we are going to say a rule set is “inspired by” than ultimately we can claim OD&D the winner by causality. No study is needed. All claims are immaterial.

More specifically, my problem with looking at the clones in the way of the blogs author is that many (perhaps most) that claim to be originated as models of OD&D tend to be informed and include material from later editions.

[captainjapan]

If, say, OD&D's intellectual share were based on the total word count of the supplements and modules printed post-OGL, then he might have something. However, that was a figure too ambitious for the author to calculate.

The Reddit link he included points to a B/X vs. AD&D discussion rather than OD&D, anyway.

[Starbeard]

Yeah, I suspect the authors of the more recent "OD&D" clones don't quite realize (or maybe they do) that they aren't really informed by actual OD&D as much as they are by Swords & Wizardry rules and Dungeon Crawl Classics writing style. The clone market has also turned things full circle, and it seems that we went from "It's all OD&D" circa 2000, to "Every edition is a unique game" circa 2010 with the first clones, and now back to "Anything not Advanced is OD&D" again because the clones all inform each other. Clones of clones indeed.

That's not so much an assessment of quality, just of where interests lie. Outside of a certain core that focuses specifically on BX, I think people have lost interest in parsing out every edition of non-AD&D and keeping those base stocks pure.

[rredmond]

Krikey! Has the torch in captainjapan's avatar always been colorized?
Looks great!! (Sorry for the tangent.)

[captainjapan]

Feb 16, 2022 12:19:46 GMT -6 rredmond said:

Krikey! Has the torch in captainjapan 's avatar always been colorized?
Looks great!! (Sorry for the tangent.)

ms paint