Is OSRIC the new in print "defacto" D&D?

[Obryn]

Much as I love OSRIC, I'm going to go with a No.

-O

 

[Maggan]

(and I think most people from my generation)

What generation would that be? I got started with D&D using the Red Box Basic, and I have been led to believe that scores and scores of other gamers did so as well, which would mean that for my generation, the Red Box Basic is the de facto D&D. And I'm not sure that has a clone yet.

I'm 40, by the way.

/M

 

[Obryn]

Basic Fantasy (BFRPG) is pretty much the B/X clone, IIRC.

-O

 

[Ourph]

Basic Fantasy (BFRPG) is pretty much the B/X clone, IIRC.

-O

BFRPG is more "inspired by" B/X than a clone of it. There are significant differences between BFRPG and B/X. The most notable is probably that BFRPG uses split races and classes AD&D style. Labyrinth Lord is more of a true clone of the B/X & BECMI games.

 

[Mark]

Is OSRIC the new in print "defacto" D&D?

Now that they have sold a couple hundred thousand units, I would say it is impossible to think of them as otherwise.



Howsthatwhathuh?

 

[Obryn]

Wait, isn't Labyrinth Lord the one with the Greek inspiration and the "We were the first RPG!" tongue-in-cheek humor?

Oh wait - that's Mazes & Minotaurs. I always get those confused. Carry on!

-O

 

[Remathilis]

Basic Fantasy (BFRPG) is pretty much the B/X clone, IIRC.

-O

As Ourph said, its inspired by it, not really a clone of. Sorta like how Castles & Crusades is inspired by, but not a clone of, AD&D.

 

[Treebore]

When I woke this morning I had a thought, I (and I think most people from my generation) always considered 1E AD&D the "base game" on which everything else was built (the defacto D&D) and measured. Yes, OD&D existed, but it was pretty loose, not complete enough. 1E nailed Gygax's vision, OD&D not really. 3E and 4E are too far removed to hold the defacto title. LL and S&W are likewise too loose and too unique (with strong brands). As I see it, OSRIC is going to be the in print standard by which all other versions of D&D (and clones, such as S&W, LL and C&C will be measured (the out of print will always be 1E of course). OSRIC's growth will undoubtedly be increasing in the future, but I wonder if anyone will notice. Off to work, I'll post more tonight.

I agree it is the defacto 1E D&D. IE its in print, its usable to allow more 1E AD&D products to be published, and it can even be used to play AD&D.


Don't know if I would call it the defacto D&D across the board, like Aus Snow said that is very personal. For instance Castles and Crusades is my defacto D&D.

 

[nightraven]

Treebore, I didn't mean to say 1E AD&D was a better system then C&C, to each their own. 1E AD&D just seems like the system people (my age) go to first when trying to describe what the version or game they are playing is like (at least amongst the old timers I know) thus the default. Its old enough to be a root (and was the first break out version with the most players), but complete enough to offer points of comparison (where OD&D seemed so basic leaving stuff up to the DM and allowing max variation between tables, it has fewer points of comparison, and even those points wouldn't be legit as the DM was supposed to have a more flexible system to mold).

I remember explaining 3E when it came out in terms of how it was similar and different to 1E (not OD&D). I did the same with C&C. I think this was because around here most know the 1E system (not so much OD&D, or if they did it was heavily home brewed). I also picture the development of the FRPG industry like a tree, and 1E (having been the most popular, first, and most complete at the time) is its massive trunk from which everything grew out in all sorts of directions...4E its latest (OD&D and Chainmail its roots).

I only mention OSRIC because its in print at lulu, is already widely distributed and its 1E. It has nothing to do with numbers of sales or its placement in stores.

 

[Ariosto]

One factor in the "graying" of our hobby is that D&D has had a notable ability to enchant lifelong devotees -- so that the demographic skews older even with a constant influx of younger participants. For a significant segment, 1E AD&D is indeed archetypal, and even people who have mainly played 2E may see the differences as negligible.

The rapid acquisition of "brand recognition" by OSRIC accounts, I suspect, for the retention of the otherwise cryptic name rather than replacement with something "sexier". It quickly became evident that the project was finding utility beyond its conceptual mission of facilitating commercial publication of AD&D-compatible modules and other products.

Interestingly, I don't think there is any provision to prevent (e.g.) Wizards of the Coast from publishing an edition and raking in whatever profits might thereby accrue. In that respect, it's analogous to Linux -- which cannot have been too far from the minds of Ryan Dancey, et al, when promulgating the OGL.

It is pretty nifty that one can download the rule book for free, and be thereby equipped to understand the intent of something written in those terms -- and so to translate them into whatever other game system one may prefer.

That "lingua Franca" aspect is something I recall fondly from the days when nearly every RPGer was familiar with D&D in one recension or another -- and the differences among editions were pretty negligible.

I could take a concept created for a campaign of RuneQuest, Traveller, or whatever, and write it up in D&D lingo to share with gamers all over the world. That was pretty cool, and it would be pretty cool if things were to become so again.