A rant on retro clones...

[Remathilis]

In retro Basic D&D disccssions, I tend to toss out Basic Fantasy because its NOT a clone, its an alternate system inspired by Basic D&D. As such, there a dozens of alternative rules inside it that are different, yet compatible, with BECMI. For example, BFRPG separates race and class (like AD&D) but uses racial traits similar to BD&D. This is a great system for people who might like the simplicity of BD&D but want the option of elf thieves or halfling clerics.

I do this for the reason I found Basic Fantasy in the first place; I loved BECMI/RC but I wanted more options than even the RC opened (as well as some updated math, like upwards AC and faster scaling saves) when I found BFRPG, I found an essentially houseruled RC done the way I would have wanted it done. Assuming there are others out there looking for some good alternative, I mention in it on such threads.

 

[TarionzCousin]

You like ranting late at night? You should really try Tweeting. It's exactly like posting on a message board only better 'cause I said so. All the cool kids (me and all my really smart friends) are doing it.

 

[pukunui]

It's not just retro-clones, it's a general rule of RPG messageboard behaviour.

The rule is:-

Q: "I like game X, but there's a problem because..." (insert reason here). "Can anyone recommend a similar game I might like?"
A: "Try game Y! I like game X too, and when I tried game Y I had a lot of fun!"

This is a cool answer.

Q: "How should I handle situation Z in game X?"
A: "Play game Y instead! I used to play game X, but when I tried game Y, I found it's much better."

This is not a cool answer.

Well said. This reminds me of my old pet-peeve, which was whenever somebody asks for help building or leveling up a character, someone inevitably posts, "Just get X, Y or Z magic item!" ... Who are these people who assume that every PC has unfettered access to every magic item in the game? "Hey GM, some guy on a forum told me my PC needs X. Can I get that? Whaddaya mean, no?!"

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

I refuse to participate in the Clone Wars.

I'm gonna be a navigator on a spice freighter instead!

 

[Dice4Hire]

The only good clone is a dead clone.

 

[Spinachcat]

I recommend Retroclones often because even if a poster owns the old D&D books, his entire group quite often does not. Instead of sending his players running around eBay, he can download a 95% similiar clone for free and distribute it for free among his group.

And there is no better way to lure your players into trying something new (or old) than passing along FREE stuff.

Also, we must remember why the Retros exist. They were made to make Classic D&D easy to access for everyone now and into the future AND they were made so new adventures, settings and supplements can be legally sold for use with both the original books and their clones.

The OSR and the clones have only been a win-win for everyone interested in Old School RPG gameplay.

BTW, have you checked out MAZES & MINOTAURS?
M&M

Now, that there is just plain shilling! Shameless I tell ya!

 

[Wik]

I recommend Retroclones often because even if a poster owns the old D&D books, his entire group quite often does not. Instead of sending his players running around eBay, he can download a 95% similiar clone for free and distribute it for free among his group.

Fair enough. but in my experience, this is not the reason people name drop the game. It's done entirely as a "why play BECMI when you can play the clone that is exactly like BECMI" tone. In another thread, I rather clearly stated that I had all the relevant books and knew the game I was going to play... and still got more than a few clone suggestions. THAT is what ticks me off.

And it's not just clones. It's also Savage Worlds, which will get recommended in pretty much any "game discussion" thread. If someone complains about one rule in WFRP, there will be someone name-dropping Savage Worlds. And yeah, it just annoys me a tad.

And there is no better way to lure your players into trying something new (or old) than passing along FREE stuff.

Not for my group. If it's free, they naturally assume that it's therefore worthless. Since I'm usually the only guy that buys books (my group consists mostly of pirate-type people, unfortunately), the books are already "free" for them. But if they were free at the start... they hate the product. My group is weird... an entirely different thread, though.

Also, we must remember why the Retros exist. They were made to make Classic D&D easy to access for everyone now and into the future AND they were made so new adventures, settings and supplements can be legally sold for use with both the original books and their clones.

Remember when OSRIC first came out? The original goal was to have a rules reference that new designers referred to so new 1e products could come out. It was basically intended that no one would actually USE the clone - they would use their 1e books, and use OSRIC to get new products.

I realize this has changed a bit since inception, but the idea remains the same. If you already have the books, the clones exist purely so you can buy new products for your game. If someone has the books already, mentioning the clone should be done only for those hoping to expand their game - not as a replacement for those books.

BTW, have you checked out MAZES & MINOTAURS?
M&M

Now, that there is just plain shilling! Shameless I tell ya!

Yeah, that was pretty shameless. But hey, it's actually not a bad game. I have a copy of the clone.

 

[Dausuul]

It's not just retro-clones, it's a general rule of RPG messageboard behaviour.

The rule is:-

Q: "I like game X, but there's a problem because..." (insert reason here). "Can anyone recommend a similar game I might like?"
A: "Try game Y! I like game X too, and when I tried game Y I had a lot of fun!"

This is a cool answer.

Q: "How should I handle situation Z in game X?"
A: "Play game Y instead! I used to play game X, but when I tried game Y, I found it's much better."

This is not a cool answer.

Even more generally, it's bad form to assume you know better than the OP what the OP needs. Answer the question that was asked. If you don't have a good answer to the question that was asked, or feel that it would be an undue burden upon you to provide one (I'm thinking of the people complaining that they don't want to have to recap the rule changes in Retro Clone X), then don't reply at all. Nobody's forcing you to post.

 

[Rel]

Even more generally, it's bad form to assume you know better than the OP what the OP needs. Answer the question that was asked. If you don't have a good answer to the question that was asked, or feel that it would be an undue burden upon you to provide one (I'm thinking of the people complaining that they don't want to have to recap the rule changes in Retro Clone X), then don't reply at all. Nobody's forcing you to post.

On the other hand I think it is good practice to assume that people are posting with good intentions and are trying to be helpful. Even if you find what they posted to be useless to you as the OP, consider that they took the time to reply to your thread. That's worth something all by itself.

 

[Wik]

On the other hand I think it is good practice to assume that people are posting with good intentions and are trying to be helpful. Even if you find what they posted to be useless to you as the OP, consider that they took the time to reply to your thread. That's worth something all by itself.

I actually fully agree with this. Just, for some reason, I get my feathers in a ruffle when advice on retro clones is given when it wasn't asked for... or when someone inevitably recommends Savage Worlds on a discussion about D&D hit points.

OP: "I like D&D, and love the game to bits, but the hit point system bugs me. >>Goes into the cliche about how HP damage isn't 'realistic'<< Any suggestions?
REPLY: "You should play Savage Worlds. >>Spiel on why Savage Worlds is the best game in the world, and how it has already prevented WW3<<