Is this worth my while?

[Lanefan]

I'm nterested in seeing where you get with this, and I'd be happy to lob in suggestions and ideas if you like, but whether I'd be interested in using the end result depends on what the end result turns out to be. So, my answer to the poll would be "I hope so", but that's not an option...

Lanefan

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Yes indeed, you are of course quite right.

Indeed he is.

Dunno though ... somehow I thought that HOW they did the "updating" and conversion of the older material might've been the driving inspiration that could be used in a new ruleset. In that case (if this IS in fact where RC is coming from) maybe it would be better for it to develop more?

Beyond this I have somehow had the feeling that OSRIC was eventually going to develop into its own system, even if that is not amongst it's present goals or original intents. But this is just my own impressions, I guess. Perhaps I am just projecting them onto RC? Wishful thinking maybe?

If OSRIC does develop into its own system, it won't be me who's done it. I'm not personally interested in doing that.

However, if someone else is interested, they can do it. The OSRIC license is pretty broad.

If RC is interested, he could be the person to develop OSRIC in that way. No reason why not.

 

[Dykstrav]

I'm interested in seeing something like this, although I really don't think that it'd be worth your time.

I think you'll end up with a "book is always better than the movie" situation. People who care enough about the rules set to start modifying them wholesale usually want to see something specific. The chances that you're going to mesh up with everyone else's idea of what a OSRIC/SRD merged rules set should be are pretty slim. Some people would really dig it and others would hate it. But at least you'd get alot of input and alot if ideas changing hands. In this sense, it may be worth doing it...

But honestly, I don't think many people would adopt it for their home games, any more than I've seen people adapt OSRIC or the SRD in favor of the actual 1E or 3E rulebooks.

 

[Breakdaddy]

I voted that you suck, but I dont really believe it (much).
On topic: It would be a nice exercise but I doubt I would ever play it. I have C&C for my lite gaming and while it's not perfect, it does the job quite nicely. I have WFRP for for awesome setting flavor with decent rules liteness as well, so I have little time to pick up another Fantasy system. Like many others, I would cannibalize any parts of your system that I felt were super cool and would leave your baking husk in the sun to be eaten by.... wait, that was for something else...

 

[Nikosandros]

I'm always interested in experimentation about the rules, so I've voted yes.

However, I'm unclear about your proposal. Could you explain it better? What would you include from OSRIC and from the SRD? What are your design goals?

 

[Raven Crowking]

I voted that you suck, but I dont really believe it (much).

That I suck? That poll option is about the Rules Cyclopedia!


(Just kidding)

 

[Kafkonia]

Personally, with the number of rules sets I already have (including two or three theoretically-generic ones) the only way I'd be interested in another would be if the world it was set in grabbed me. As that's not the case here, I voted no.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

 

[Nikosandros]

However, I'm unclear about your proposal. Could you explain it better? What would you include from OSRIC and from the SRD? What are your design goals?

bump...

 

[RFisher]

I don't foresee that I'd use it, so I reluctantly voted "No". I hate to discourage you. My advice is to completely ignore anything but the "Yes" count. If it gets over whatever threshold you feel would make it worth your time, go ahead & do it even if there are 100 times as many "No" votes.