• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Retro-gaming

markkat

First Post
I just had to chime in to say a few things.

1: Great thread.
2: Mullen is a fantastic artist.
3: I agree with GG's analysis.

Wayfarers was created in parallel with the retro-clone movement (I started putting it to paper in 2005), but the game actually took shape in somewhat of a vacuum. It wasn't until we were putting the final touches on the game until I really became aware of the old-school renaissance. That said, we been more than happy to sidle up with the movement and be a part of it, if even on the periphery.

I think an often over-looked asset of the old-school movement is the publisher invitation for fan-created material. So many new people are creating material and the creators of these games are embracing it. To me, gaming feels like a hobby again.

No doubt, this is a great time.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Pat

First Post
Another game with retro credentials:

Fire & Sword: An evolution of the BRP system by Ray Turney, one of the designers of the original RuneQuest RPG. Also inspired by Pendragon, as well as other games.
 

CruelSummerLord

First Post

If you follow that link and look in the comments section, a guy named Anders sums up a lot of my own personal feelings on the subject (I'm 27, so I could be considered part of the younger generation). Before I get into that, though, I'd also mention the phenomenon of how older media can end up attracting younger fans years or even decades after it was originally produced. I'm surprised at how many people my age and younger I've come across who are fans of the Beatles or ABBA, Sherlock Holmes and other Victorian-era literature, older cartoons, and other things like that. It could be the same thing in RPGs-younger people stumble across these things either on their own, through their parents or other mediums- something that's only become easier in the Internet age-and become fans of it themselves.

Referring back to what Anders said in the above link, I'm in kind of the same boat he/she is in that I'm more than a little turned off by the prevalence of super-powered abilities to avoid death, the wide variety of bizarre nonhuman races, and magic items being treated as tradable commodities, particularly from 3E onwards where non-spellcasters needed to be decked out like Christmas trees in magic items if they wanted to keep up with the advanced style of play.

The more gritty, lower-key style of 1E, where magic items are fewer (relatively so, at least), it's easier to die, dozens of different fantastical races did not openly walk the streets, and there are fewer super-powered characters running around, all appeal to guys like Anders and me far more than does the more World of Warcraft-inspired style we see today, with the inclusion of tieflings, dragonborn and magic swords being a dime a dozen.

As well, I have to admit that the restrictions and quirks of older editions appeal to me as a writer and give the setting its own distinct flavor, for all that it's supposed to be plain-vanilla fantasy. The Vancian magic system, and the idea that dwarves and halflings have problems with it, both give them distinct traits and a means of further developing the game.

Dwarves may not typically be druids in the same way that humans or elves can...so why not play a druid of the hills or the underground, rather than the typical forest druid that's based in the RAW? Being less reliant on magic, dwarves and gnomes have come to rely on engineering and technology to get the job done for them, while halflings have played to their strengths in having mutually beneficial relationships with other races, trading their own particular skills in agriculture, textiles or animal husbandry in exchange for physical protection.

And what kind of effects will the Vancian magic system have on the development of counterparts of non-European cultures? Many First Nations didn't have books as we know them today, but cultures patterned after them in a D&D universe will have had to develop their own types of spellbooks if they want to use magic. Do they obtain paper and ink from trade with other cultures, or do they make their own substitutes, perhaps using hides as paper, sinews as binding, and berry juices or animal fat as ink? Either way, this will have spurred the development of writing, and so they'll eventually create their own written scripts like any European-based culture would.
 

Ariosto

First Post
There is no reason (apart from a DM's house rules) that one can't play a dragonborn in an "old-school" game; after all, playing a full-blooded dragon was explicitly mentioned as a possibility in the very first D&D book!

All sorts of 4E-ish variants are part of different people's seasoning to taste. By far the most fundamental "rule" of the old style is that it's your game, to do with as you please.

Likewise, some currently popular styles in fantasy illustration don't rock my boat -- but they are not necessarily at odds with the classic style of play.

Want your characters to be more like comic-book heroes from the start? Just start 'em with enough XP to have the levels you want! It's probably less work than trying to get "gritty" with 4E.

It's really up to the DM whether PCs start with any magic items, and what is where (or present at all) in the campaign.

I don't think anything in "new school" D&D is any more "far out" than Empire of the Petal Throne, Gamma World or The Arduin Grimoire ... certainly no more than all three combined!

So, I don't think it's really productive to paint the older approach to rules and to challenging players with a brush dipped in disco-era aesthetics.
 

Goblinoid Games

First Post
So, I don't think it's really productive to paint the older approach to rules and to challenging players with a brush dipped in disco-era aesthetics.

Me neither...I prefer to paint it with 80's hair metal!

I listened to the Scorpions, Black Sabbath, AC/DC, Iron maiden, etc. etc. as I was writing Mutant Future.
 

Ariosto

First Post
Oh, yeah -- I think a metal groove fits very well. There's a lot of fantasy and SF influence in that field, and also in some "progressive rock" (proper term?) such as Yes and in "glam rock" such as T. Rex and David Bowie.
 

Treebore

First Post
By far the most fundamental "rule" of the old style is that it's your game, to do with as you please.

That says it all right there! I liked a lot about 3E, but the work load to get the game to where it pleased me was just overwhelming, especially at higher levels (about 10th for me). I even bought all the software aids to help me create NPC's, etc... The more I did it the more I remembered, "I didn't need all this crap back in 1E and 2E."

So one day I gave up and went back to an "old school style" of game. I haven't been this happy since I last ran 2E. In fact I think I am happier now than I ever was in all of my old 1E or 2E days.

I took a look at 4E, played it for a couple of months. Simply put we were happier playing our "old school" games. So we set 4E aside and went back to having more fun.

I get that others think old school isn't as good, or as fun, as their newer systems are, thats fine, but I and my fellow gamers are far happier where we are, and that is all that matters. What pleases each of us best.
 

Blackwind

Explorer
Well, I'm 24 and just finishing up my first Basic D&D (red box, 1983) campaign. Yes, that means red box came out a year before I was born. And yes, I'm the DM.

All the players in the campaign are 32 years old or under, as well. Only one of them actually started with red box---as for me, I actually started with the Classic D&D boxed set in 1994 and then went straight into 2nd edition.

I was also an early adopter of both 3E and 3.5, and watched the development of 4E very closely.

See, by the time 4E was announced, I was *very* tired of 3.x. The prep time was killing me, and combat took way too long to play out. Unfortunately, 4E took the game in the exact direction I *didn't* want it to go---combat became even more of a small-scale tactical wargame. Some people enjoy that, but me not so much.

I also tried C&C, but didn't like the SIEGE Engine.

Anyway, my red box game has been the most fun I've had running D&D since 3E first came out (i.e, before we got up into the higher levels). All the players have loved it, even the 4E DM (who, incidentally, admits he'd have a hard time running his game without software).

Combat is a breeze, and the rules are light enough that they never interfere with the flow of the game. It reminds me of 2nd ed., when I knew the rules so well we could play at lunchtime with no books.

Although we're using an actual old game instead of a retro-clone, I've read through LL, OSRIC, and S&W, and think they're great, and would use them in a heartbeat if I didn't have the old books.

On the other hand, I'm probably not typical of most old-school gamers (and I'm not just talking about my age)... Even though I definitely now prefer old-school D&D to new-school D&D, I'm also seeing some of the limitations of these games (as written---e.g, PCs are rewarded almost exclusively for getting treasure), and becoming more interested in some of the more Narrativist indie games.

But from now on, when I want to play D&D, I'll choose AD&D1E, B/X, or OD&D (or any of the clones) as opposed to 2E, 3.x, or 4E. Even if I do end up adding some new-fangled Narrativist mechanics.
 

Blackwind

Explorer
PS, Treebore, it was fun listening in on your C&C game that one time, despite the PCs offing each other and getting hurt feelings. Whoever was DMing that night had some good narrative-description skills, even if they might have handled the player vs. player conflict differently. Eavesdropping on a Skype game also allowed me to remember how much faster and easier combat flowed without minis, a battlemat, and 3.x tactical combat rules. Cheers!
 
Last edited:

Treebore

First Post
PS, Treebeard, it was fun listening in on your C&C game that one time, despite the PCs offing each other and getting hurt feelings. Whoever was DMing that night had some good narrative-description skills, even if they might have handled the player vs. player conflict differently. Eavesdropping on a Skype game also allowed me to remember how much faster and easier combat flowed without minis, a battlemat, and 3.x tactical combat rules. Cheers!

Yep, Don has great narrative and mood building skills. Better yet he has figured out it is best to keep the killing of PC's within the powers of the game master only! Especially when players tend to do such things over pretty petty/minor reasons. So not much player versus player stuff happens anymore.
 

Remove ads

Top