Help me understand OSRIC

[rogueattorney]

Another question: is there a list of "most prevalent houserules" for 1E AD&D that everyone used? Kind of like the "Free Parking lottery" in Monopoly? I would figure a game with as much history as 1E would have a few.

DD's already answered this to a large extent. You can get a fee clone of the Basic rules with the Labyrinth Lord game.

But, to a great extent, a lot of the houserules people used in AD&D are expressed in what OSRIC leaves out... no psionics, no weapon speeds, no weapon v. armor chart, etc.

 

[Odhanan]

Also, the index is recursive.

That is, if you're looking up Saving Throws in the index, you might find the index entry for "Saving Throws" on Page 380. In turn, the index listing will helpfully point out that the phrase "Saving Throws" is found on several pages including ... um ... Page 380, which is the index entry you're looking at.

It beats not having an index at all, but it's still pretty funny.

-O

LOL that's funny.

Despite having a complete AD&D collection, I couldn't resist and ordered the OSRIC hardcover a couple of weeks ago from Lulu. I'm waiting for it now.

As for OSRIC's goal/destination, it was really to have a First Edition reference document to use as a base to publish vintage gaming products anew. The fact that some gamers decided to use the document as a base for their gaming prompted requests of a POD option, and it finally happened recently. Really, OSRIC's purpose wasn't, as I perceive it, to replace AD&D in any case, but rather to serve as a bridge between the original AD&D volumes and the future OGL modules and supplemental materials which would ultimately be based on it.

 

[Chainsaw]

Really, OSRIC's purpose wasn't, as I perceive it, to replace AD&D in any case, but rather to serve as a bridge between the original AD&D volumes and the future OGL modules and supplemental materials which would ultimately be based on it.

This is my understanding as well. Also, weren't there some legal issues with reproducing some tables/data? I know the XP tables had to be altered a bit. Anyway, I'm not sure the omissions were errors as much as attempts to avoid stepping on legal toes..

 

[Ariosto]

I doubt that those particular omissions fall into the legal prudence category. Whatever the case, Matthew Finch (instigator of the project) is as I understand it both a former attorney and an incredibly energetic and detail-oriented person who appreciates very well how much the response to OSRIC has exceeded its initial mandate. My guess is that Editor in Chief Stuart Marshall is probably blushing red as a beet (or the reserved British equivalent).

 

[Chainsaw]

Maybe... seems like I read somewhere that OSRIC couldn't offer a complete set of clarified 1E rules without provoking legal wrangling. I'm sure there's a thread around here somewhere that addresses these issues more concretely, but I can't take the time to find it while I'm at work.

Anyway, I only make this suggestion because I'd hate to see someone unfamiliar with OSRIC write it off as incomplete without understanding a few of the assumptions and possible publication legalities. As another poster said, I'm pretty sure that, at least in the beginning, it was envisioned as a clarifying aid to 1E more than any sort of stand alone clone like Swords & Wizardry or Castles and Crusades. I could be totally wrong here. I'm sure one of the writers will chime in here sooner or later.

I read OSRIC along with the 1E DMG and PHB a few months ago, referring to OSRIC where I was confused, and found it immensely helpful.

 

[Odhanan]

OSRIC was intended as a refence for people wishing to publish First Ed material, providing a cleaned-up version of the rules elements one could use under the OGL to publish a First Ed module/supplement.

It's really cool that it took on such a life of its own, isn't it?

 

[nightraven]

I recently got my HC book, its fantastic. I can't express enough how important it is to get this book if your interested in AD&D (or gaming in general). Gygax was brilliant, but the original 3 books were layed out and explained in a way often difficult to understand. Having OSRIC will save you countless hours trying to piece the proper rules together. Even if you don't agree with the authors conclusions (based on what you read) its something to compare to.

As for some of the "holes". If you know how to play any version of D&D it should be obvious to use a d20 for saves. But your correct, there are going to be people picking this game up (perhaps their first RPG who knows) who have the right to expect the basics spelled out (like it or not OSRIC has grown up from a publishing tool to a stand alone game...IMHO the best presently in print...its 1E almost 100%). Perhaps your observation could be added to the Lulu copy? Why not ask the author Stuart Marshel?

 

[Chainsaw]

OSRIC was intended as a refence for people wishing to publish First Ed material, providing a cleaned-up version of the rules elements one could use under the OGL to publish a First Ed module/supplement.

It's really cool that it took on such a life of its own, isn't it?

You bet!

I just wish I could find some folks for 1E here in Charlotte. I'm crossing my fingers that 1E's coming back, like Pabst Blue Ribbon - it's so old that it's new again! Haha.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

There are a number of holes in the rules; for instance, no explanation of saves (what's the difference between 9 and 13? Is it percentile? D20?

"The numbers indicated on the "to hit" and saving throw tables are the scores required (or greater) on a d20 for the creature to hit its target or save against an attack of the type indicated." - OSRIC, p.28

What are saves for multi/dual-classed characters?) or how (or whether to) divide xp for multi/dual-classed characters.

"When a non-human character has more than one character class, any experience points gained by the character will be divided evenly between these two classes, even once the character can no longer progress in one of the classes." OSRIC - p.24

They do seem to have missed a proper definition of Saving Throws in addition to how saves apply for multi/dual-classed characters.

Also, are there any resources for folks who have never played pre-3E to run an OSRIC game?

Best thing there would probably be AD&D (1st Ed.) Players Handbook and Dungeon Masters Guide. Also, dragonsfoot.org is dedicated to pre-3rd Edition D&D and once you get past their occasionally rabid antagonism to all things 3rd Ed. and later is a great resource.

 

[jmucchiello]

OSRIC was intended as a refence for people wishing to publish First Ed material, providing a cleaned-up version of the rules elements one could use under the OGL to publish a First Ed module/supplement.

It's really cool that it took on such a life of its own, isn't it?

The important note here is "use under the OGL to publish".... Version 1 of OSRIC was not meant to be an in-game reference or playable on its own. It was meant to be used as a reference in your OGL section 15 to explain where the concept of xp, spells, orcs etc came from in "this" format where "this" bears a striking resemblance to 1e norms. So the idea was the publisher refers to OSRIC and can make 1e compatible stuff and the buyer uses his 1e books to play with the publisher's stuff in his game.

Version 2 of OSRIC is meant to be a complete game reference. I assume the idea being to eliminate the need to wander ebay looking for old copies of out of print 1e manuals. Instead, tell your noob player to buy OSRIC.