Are the Retro Clones doing well?

[JoeGKushner]

After starting one thread, having the person who semi-inspired it appear in that thread, I read the thread and came across this bit. It made me wonder, are the retro clones doing well?

What defines a retro clone? Is Pathrinder a retro clone?

I've got nothing against the older engines. If you read my blog, you'll see I link to dozens of old school sites. I'm just honestly curious if retro clones are viable in today's era of modern gaming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Filcher
Hey, hey, c'mon now. A +1 sword was way cooler in AD&D.

Seriously though, I miss the "magic" of earlier editions. A part of me wonders if that isn't nostalgia though. I can still remember stumbling upon my first cloak ... of ... elvenkind. WOW!

This.

After reading MANY threads on "Why 4e sux", "This is what they did wrong" and "This is why I am leaving 4e" I have done some pondering.

You see, many of the issues brought up, especially in thoughtful posts like the OP's, resonate with me to some degree.

I have been following 4e since information started being leaked, and have been pretty much a fanboi. I do see a lot of the issues with the system, although many of them are only indicative of different playing styles... but what is interesting to me is the extremity of how these issues affect people, including myself. I mean, its just a game. And then Filchers post kinda opened the clouds for me....

Its nostalgia (for me at least)... I am (and I suspect this may be true with others) trying to recapture the new and exciting strangeness of when we first played an RPG or D&D. That is why I believe the Retro-Clones are doing so well...

I am a thirty-something year old player who started when I was 10... I just started playing again after about a 10 year hiatus. I like 4e... its not perfect, but I like the system a lot. Some issues re: Magic Items and such kinda bother me, but I am now realizing that I can never go back...

Sure, I could start up with LL or BFRG or even break out my Rules Cyclopedia, but I now see that with what I know now, and how I can see the entirety of a rules system for what it is, I wouldn't enjoy it knowing that there are IMO better ways to do things, that other rules systems have demonstrated in the 20+ years since I first played...

Basically this is just a long-winded musing on why an older-gamer is so freaking hard to please (speaking of myself)

 

[Snoweel]

If there were only some way of automatically sending a notice to WotC every time I buy a retro clone. That'd show 'em.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Is Pathrinder a retro clone?

I think there are two things that constitute a retro-clone. The first is that it mimicks an older style of play. The second is that it uses the OGL in a way that uses the D20 IP but not the mechanics, which is perfectly legal and defensible under the license. The idea is that you can copyright exact text, and you can copyright IP, but you cannot claim copyright on game mechanics. Most of the retro-clones are rewording previously copyrighted material and then adapting a great deal of 3.5 IP to those games.

By comparison, Pathfinder uses most of the same mechanics of traditional D20, and the differences between it and 3.5 are to improve upon the game. I prefer to think of Pathfinder as an alternate new edition of the game. In addition to this, defining Pathfinder as retro would imply that the game system belongs to the past, and I don't think that's accurate at all.

 

[S'mon]

I wouldn't include 3e-based games like Pathfinder as retro-clones. Clones of 2e and earlier count. Castles & Crusades is marginal - it predates the term and is not a strict clone, but evokes much of 1e AD&D.

I think they're doing pretty well; in a small-press sort of way. Labyrinth Lord is on amazon, OSRIC modules were sold at my local games shop, etc. Personally as well as C&C and much C&C stuff I have purchased hardcopies of Labyrinth Lord, BFRPG, Mutant Future and OSRIC; as well as printouts of Swords & Wizardry and X-Plorers. I mostly use them for online games though, for tabletop I mostly stick to 3e and 4e.

 

[Hairfoot]

It's hard to say how well they're doing, as a group. I think Matt Finch discloses the number of downloads of Swords & Wizardry (can't find it right now), but downloads don't equal players.

There's some excitement about the upcoming release of the White Box, but whether Brave Halfling will report on sales remains to be seen.

Certainly, the online community for retroclones (which now includes many games) seems to be thriving.

I wouldn't call PF a retroclone. It's more a fixed 3.5.

 

[Jhaelen]

I've tried a retro-system once. For me it was a sobering experience. It wasn't at all as much fun as I thought it would be.

It was really just a general feeling of nostalgia that drove me to try it. I soon found out, though, that I'm not the same person I've been all those years ago and frankly prefer modern systems (and modern adventures!) these days.

 

[Umbran]

"Retro" means "calling back to prior work". Pathfinder isn't retro, in that it was formed while the thing it calls to was (and is) still current.

I will disagree with Darrin that D20 material is necessary for a retro-clone. As he notes, mechanics cannot be copyrighted. All you need for a retro-clone is to extract the mechanics from an old game, and present it with new accompanying IP. Phil Reed's FASERIP/4C project qualifies as retro-cloning, for example, and I don't believe there's any d20s in there.

 

[pawsplay]

Define "well." They are definitely products by hardcore hobbyists for hardcore hobbyists. "Let's try out a game based on a 30 year old version of a roleplaying game," is not the same sort of impulse as, "Let's catch a movie, yo."

 

[Raven Crowking]

A few thoughts:

(1) I am not at all sure that the majority of people involved in the OSG movement want to "show" WotC anything.

(2) I think of RCFG not as a "retro-clone" (although it borrows heavily from the OGC of various retro-clones), but as a fusion system, utilizing both older and newer gaming techniques and mechanics. Recognition that some older ways were better (for what you want) does not necessarily mean failing to appreciate some newer ways.

(3) How successful do "free" projects have to be, anyway? Are there any OSG games that you have to pay for? (Hardcopy, yes, I know....and suppliments/modules, but aren't the core rules all available as free PDFs?)

AFAICT, retro-clones (and related) are all about ownership of one's fun, require no success beyond that ownership, and have no sinister overtones to "show WotC", force you to play them, etc., etc., etc.


RC

 

[Umbran]

(3) How successful do "free" projects have to be, anyway? Are there any OSG games that you have to pay for? (Hardcopy, yes, I know....and suppliments/modules, but aren't the core rules all available as free PDFs?)

It doesn't seem to me that Hackmaster or Castles and Crusades are at all in the same business you are, RC, so they'll have different success criteria.