Designing a 2e Retro-Clone

[Remathilis]

Second Edition Gamers, Come unto me!!!

1e has OSRIC. OD&D has a couple clones. 2e has no love.

IMHO, second edition fixed a lot of major issues 1e has (fixing character classes, initiative, and adding NWPs). Its the later supplements that screwed things up with inconsistent power-levels (compare: Complete Priests Handbook to Faiths and Avatars) and poorly thought out ideas (Skills & Powers, I'm looking at you.)

Perhaps it is high-time for a 2e retro-clone. But how?

OSRIC has shown you can make a relatively faithful adaptation of 1e using the OGL and SRD. In fact, OSRIC would probably be a good place to start (piggy-backing off them seems fitting considering how much 2e piggy-backed 1e). There are some considerations to think on though...

1.) Would people be interested in a "faithful" conversion (keeping as much of 2e as possible) or would people be interesting in making a "perfect" edition that fixes and tweaks some poor elements of the game?
2.) The original 2e PHB had six races (human, elf, dwarf, gnome, halfling, half-elf) and nine classes (fighter, ranger, paladin, mage, illusionist, cleric, druid, thief, bard and rules for making specialist wizards and priests). Using the OGL though, you could re-create 2e monks, barbarians, assassins, half-orcs, tieflings, and much of the Complete Book of Humanoids. Would this be a worthwhile consideration; expanding the "core"?
3.) Later books (particularly Spells & Magic) re-organized spell schools, added bennies for specialist wizards, and generally fixed spellcasting classes a bit. Would these changes be welcomed, or would (again) a core-only approach be welcomed?
4.) Kits; yes or no? Specifically, if there were kits, should they be build from the ground up or reproduced from original sources (more or less)?
5.) Fixes to the Non-Weapon Proficiency system or left as is?
6.) Upward or downward scaling AC?
7.) Any more ideas, comments or concerns?

I'm curious right now what a 2e retro-clone should look like.

 

[S'mon]

Art should preferably be Elmore not Easley.

 

[Lackhand]

I'm just an interested observer, but my $.02 says:
1) perfect is good.
2) Feel free to expand the core. "Publish" it separately. (in other words: don't expand the core, but do feel free to muse )
3) Reorganizing spell schools is good. Other changes are probably not worth it.
4) Kits: Depends on what your fixes were. I'm inclined towards rebuild.
5) NWPs: I'd say it depends on what your fixes were. I'm inclined towards retain.
6) UPWARDS SCALING AC.
7) You rock.

 

[meomwt]

AC moves upwards - much more intuitive, IMO.
Expand the core classes again, so add 2e monks, assassins, etc. Ditto the half-orc, plus some of The Complete Book of Humanoids (how much fun did I have creating nasty Kobold Fighters and Shamans when that sucker arrived ).
I'd leave the NWP system alone, no one ever used it anyway.
Leave magic mostly "as is" but add in Sha'ir (Al Qadim) who were cool and Wild Magic (from Tome of Magic) which was a joy from both sides of the DM Screen .
Ixnay on the kits. They made some classes and combo's too overpowered. I generally didn't allow them.

 

[Psion]

Perhaps it is high-time for a 2e retro-clone. But how?

First question: how clone-y do you want it to be?

1.) Would people be interested in a "faithful" conversion (keeping as much of 2e as possible) or would people be interesting in making a "perfect" edition that fixes and tweaks some poor elements of the game?

My inclination would be to make a "Pathfinder" version. I.E., one that would let me grab a 2e book off the shelf and play with it, but with the goal of improving weaknesses in key areas.

2.) The original 2e PHB had six races (human, elf, dwarf, gnome, halfling, half-elf) and nine classes (fighter, ranger, paladin, mage, illusionist, cleric, druid, thief, bard and rules for making specialist wizards and priests). Using the OGL though, you could re-create 2e monks, barbarians, assassins, half-orcs, tieflings, and much of the Complete Book of Humanoids. Would this be a worthwhile consideration; expanding the "core"?

"Core" or not is quibblable, perhaps pointless in a fan product. But again, with the aim of "playing my favorite 2e products with a perfected game", I think that races that appeared in those 2e products would be needful (like Tieflings for Planescape).

3.) Later books (particularly Spells & Magic) re-organized spell schools, added bennies for specialist wizards, and generally fixed spellcasting classes a bit. Would these changes be welcomed, or would (again) a core-only approach be welcomed?

It would be difficult, but those books were some of my faves... when appreciably houseruled. But that might be an "add on" product.

4.) Kits; yes or no? Specifically, if there were kits, should they be build from the ground up or reproduced from original sources (more or less)?

I think kits were central enough to the 2e experience that they should be there. Perhaps simplified a bit.

5.) Fixes to the Non-Weapon Proficiency system or left as is?

Fixes, yes.

6.) Upward or downward scaling AC?

Flip a coin. It's be easier to use existing product with downward scaling... but then, a quick conversion rule might work best. If you have an on-the fly conversion rule, you may be really having your cake and eating it too (frex, create a "target number" that is equal to 10-AC, or somesuch.

7.) Any more ideas, comments or concerns?

AFAIAC, what made 2e was the settings. I don't see the fans rewriting existing settings, which is why I could see a "compatible but perfected" approach being of interest.

But perhaps we could continue the tradition and make more offbeat settings.

 

[Psion]

Art should preferably be Elmore not Easley.

Elmore did put out an open content art compilation.

Not lavish color covers, but still... part of your wish is do-able.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

From the time of OSRIC 2 release, there'll be Open Game Content in OSRIC (which includes all the character generation stuff, all the spells and the basic mechanics).

The Open Game Content in OSRIC will be, broadly, the first three chapters of this document (except the artwork and the variable experience rule, which are product identity):

OSRIC2_LR.pdf

Simplest way might be just to offer alternative versions of chapters I and III of OSRIC? Alternatively if you wanted to release it as a complete game, talk to me about licensing... if I like the game and it's a community project (i.e. free to the end-user) then I probably won't charge you for the license.

A 2e retro-clone would need different artwork, most likely -- and I don't have the power to license OSRIC's artwork in any case (it remains the property of the original contributor).

 

[ExploderWizard]

Art should preferably be Elmore not Easley.

Keep it black and white and Easley is fine. Add color and the world becomes ochre

 

[S'mon]

Keep it black and white and Easley is fine. Add color and the world becomes ochre

Yes... I was thinking of his colour pieces for the 2e book covers, which really get a shredding over on the Grognardia blog.

 

[S'mon]

Elmore did put out an open content art compilation.

Not lavish color covers, but still... part of your wish is do-able.

That's awesomely cool.