Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="aramis erak" data-source="post: 9260841" data-attributes="member: 6779310">D&D is the most played RPG in the world.As of yesterday afternoon in Pacific Time, there were between 15000-15100  RPGs in the RPG Geek database. And new ones every week.The plethora is so much than 99.99% will never get discussed by more than a few dozen people in any detail.That depends upon the GM and if INT and WIS are dump-stats for the character. If the IQ180 player is playing an Int 3 Wis 4 big dumb brute, and comes up with a plan the barbarian couldn't reasonably have come up with, it's time for an Int check. (I've had that happen. They failed. Everyone laughed, and then did the in character thing and ignored the idea.I starting doing that for social with CHA because the glib player would dumpstat CHA...  Likewise, if the IQ 90 Player stops to ask if their Wis 15 pC would think their planned action is bad, on a successful roll, I'll tell them honestly, and on a fail, tell them nothing. Wis Save vs Player is an old standard from having mentally damaged folks at game. One player had lost about 30 points of IQ after a traumatic head injury while in the Navy. He literally wasn't as smart as his characters, so we cut him some slack. And let him just declare and roll when others had to narrate, declare, and roll.T&T did that in 1975... Skipping to-hit is one of the oldest divergences from D&D.As is Armor reducing damage, not making to-hit harder, as, again, T&T did that in 1975,Skills instead of classes - Traveller ('77) and Runequest ('78)Unified resolution mechanic: 1978 - RuneQuest.Much of "Modern" design is harkening back to the mid 1970's mechanically, & 2010s textbook design..D&D Vancian doesn't match what Cugel does in Vance's writing. He memorizes one spell, and then casts it several times without forgetting it.No worse than yours.Wrong. See belowOnly partially correct; most OSR games using the OGL also use the 3.0 SRD for the core attribute list and explicatory text, as well as the distinctly D&D terms, and often the spells.  Essentially, "Protection from Lawyer."While technically, the OGL wasn't needed, it was a sense of security that one could go for a purely judicial decision by motion practice alone... The SRD was that much less to paraphrase.Plus it fails to mention the then-stated reasons for starting the OSRIC projects - AD&D 1 wasn't supported and hadn't been for almost a decade, and people's books were often falling apart. And replacements were nigh-impossible to get. And people wanted to release works compatible with CoC and with AD&D 1e, but couldn't indicate that directly - the OSRIC mark indicated AD&D 1E compatibility; the GORE mark CoC compatibility... without violating US Trademark law.Noting that, if they were in the US, the mechanics are quite literally unprotectable, as long as you can paraphrase them; using the OGL actually reduced your rights, but giving peace of mind, and much more rapid development.I'm basing this upon having watched the OSRIC and GORE development projects from not long after formation of the projects to initial release. And that the SRD is referenced in the OSRIC notice...[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.leveldrain.com/srd[/URL]It mentions the OGL and the SRD, and the older editions which inspired the SRD, and a bunch more.Oversimplification to the level either of you did is not good; you both are partially correct and largely wrong, because you're leaving out many important factors.</blockquote>

Verification