More info about this OSRIC thing?

[Henry]

If I recall correctly, TSR sued over Mythus but settled out of court. TSR bought Mythus for a hefty amount of money - much more than the cost of developing a game system.

And to second you, Gary Gygax has confirmed this multiple times in correspondence.

 

[Janx]

I guess that's what confuses me about OSRIC. Why would I write a product for 1e rules (or OSRIC) when I could write it for 3E? Asside from the novelty of it, it seems contrary.

In the computer world, nobody in their right mind codes for DOS, Windows 3.x, or Windows95. Yes there are some folks still using it, but they are a minority. And that's not presuming the new is better than the old. You could pay somebody to code for an old environment, but because it's a smaller niche, you'd charge more (because you'd get fewer sales, or because it's a rarer commodity of people who can code for it).

I think it would be different if the majority of the consumer's rejected the newer version, and the majority was using the older, but I'm pretty sure that's not the case.

I guess it's not my bag. I'm certainly not in the target demographic.

As for it being a suitable RPG, I'm certain it's just a matter of time. A little more textual fluffing, and some added material, and your OSRIC could easily be the equivalent of the PH, DMG and MM. Heck, you could use the items mostly verbatim from the SRD, and the monsters just need converting back to 1e.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

I guess that's what confuses me about OSRIC. Why would I write a product for 1e rules (or OSRIC) when I could write it for 3E?

The only reason you'd do it is if you felt the old school rules were preferable. If you prefer 3.x, then thanks for your interest, but you're right to say that you aren't the target demographic.

OSRIC is unashamedly and very directly aimed at a niche market.

 

[tenkar]

I think that what Janex is doing wrong is comparing RPGs to computer software... there is little to compare.

An older RPG is still viable. I can break out my 1st Edition AdnD books and still have the same fun I had 25 years ago. Same could be said about the 1st Edition Traveller rules (much better then any of the latter incarnations IMHO), the 1st Edition Paranoia Rules, 1st Edition Runequest... etc. Rule sets might go out of style, but they do not become obsolete in the same way computer software does.

The nitches might be smaller then the D20 / 3.x rulesets are, but the niches are still out there. I'll be interested in seeing OSRIC material that is released... probably won't see much use from me but I expect the products to be high quality... niches seem to bring out the best in creative thinking

 

[Janx]

I think that what Janex is doing wrong is comparing RPGs to computer software... there is little to compare.

An older RPG is still viable. I can break out my 1st Edition AdnD books and still have the same fun I had 25 years ago. Same could be said about the 1st Edition Traveller rules (much better then any of the latter incarnations IMHO), the 1st Edition Paranoia Rules, 1st Edition Runequest... etc. Rule sets might go out of style, but they do not become obsolete in the same way computer software does.

The nitches might be smaller then the D20 / 3.x rulesets are, but the niches are still out there. I'll be interested in seeing OSRIC material that is released... probably won't see much use from me but I expect the products to be high quality... niches seem to bring out the best in creative thinking

Actually, I'm very qualified to make that comparison. I've been programming for 20+ years, I've seen all the editions of D&D, and all the major OSes. From my perspective, RPG engines are very analagous to Operating Systems.

And computer software doesn't become obsolete, it becomes replaced by newer versions with more features (and new bugs). I've got a client who still runs a DOS program to manage his shop. The old apps and games still do what they did, and are just as useful as they were before (especially if you have the old hardware). It's just a matter of there being newer replacements that do more than the old.

P&P gets my point, I believe. I'm not making a value judgement on OSRIC itself. It may be the best written version of 1E to ever exist. However, because it targets an older system that has a modern replacement (not the last and unsupported version), the market for such a product is constrained, compared to writing for the newest system.

 

[John Stark]

However, because it targets an older system that has a modern replacement (not the last and unsupported version), the market for such a product is constrained, compared to writing for the newest system.

The thing is, the OSRIC writers knew that they were shooting for a niche market. Indeed, from what I've been able to discern, it was one of the motivating factors for the creation of OSRIC; i.e., to provide new material for old school gamers who have no interest in the new school, as well as a way for them to publish their own old school material if they so choose.

Besides, IMO its less a marketing thing as it is a matter of growing the old school gaming community. The hope, in part I believe, is that new products and publishing opportunites will draw interest that will benefit the old school community as a whole.

 

[Henry]

P&P gets my point, I believe. I'm not making a value judgement on OSRIC itself. It may be the best written version of 1E to ever exist. However, because it targets an older system that has a modern replacement (not the last and unsupported version), the market for such a product is constrained, compared to writing for the newest system.

Oh, unashamedly constrained, I'm sure. One might say that there's no use for old DOS software that won't run on your new XP machine, yet people have put the time and effort into DOSbox, an open source software just specifically to run those old games and apps where an XP machine falls down flat. To extend that analogy, what if the advent of DOSBox opened up this whole subcommunity of people who started selling DOS software again, because of its portability, its size, and its speed on older machines? Unlikely, but a similar idea holds.

However, where a comparison diverges is that people are more likely to re-read a Victor Hugo novel, play a Grateful Dead record, or dig up a compilation of old TV shows than to dig out old DOS software and re-run it.

Now, as for market size, there's no comparison in D&D versus a market for, say, AD&D. However, it IS comparable in size to a d20 Publisher; I have a feeling that Troll Lords is doing pretty well with Castles and Crusades, at least as well as any other successful d20 Publisher out there. If there's a market, there's a need for product, and that's what OSRIC is trying to tap into, with a tool they hope will be as useful for publishers as the OGL was for the third-party movement itself.

 

[tenkar]

Actually, The old apps and games still do what they did, and are just as useful as they were before (especially if you have the old hardware). It's just a matter of there being newer replacements that do more than the old.

Thing is, with RPGs newer doesn't always mean better or more useful. It is a comparison of apples to oranges comparing RPG evolution and obsolescence with that of computer programing.

In any case, D20 and OGL publishing is a nitch market. A publisher needs to find a nitch that is viable as slapping "D20" on the cover doesn't sell nearly as well as when 3.0 was first released. OSRIC may be a very viable market in comparison to other OGL nitches. Many still play older versions of DnD and that market is pretty much untapped at this point.

I personally eagerly await the "Spawns of OSRIC"... as always, the market itself will decide if OSRIC is viable or stillborn.

 

[Faraer]

Flaw in the operating system analogy, which I think is largely concocted by manufacturers wanting to sell the latest thing, is that recent software is written for more powerful hardware than older software and is likely to be legitimately better just because of that, which is part of the connotation version numbers are used to suggest.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

The Open Game License guru, Ryan Dancey, has spoken about OSRIC's license page assertions on the ogf-l mailing list. Here it is reproduced:

Re:OSRIC

Their license page is simply incorrect in many of its assertations.

To the extent that the charts of ability scores do not represent a non-linear mathmatical function (i.e., the figures are arbitrarily made up by the original writer) they're protected by copyright and can't be reused without permission.

To the extent that the class & racial limitations and individual power descriptions and level dependent abilities and game modifiers match those of AD&D (any edition) and are not the result of a simple linear mathematical function, those templates represent selection, arrangement and presentation copyrights inherent in AD&D and suffer the same limitations.

Spell names which are not OGC but are in AD&D and are "not obvious" (i.e. they contain some creative element) are copyright by WotC.

The 'to hit' charts, to the extent that they represent non-linear functions, are protected by WotC copyright.

In summary: I wouldn't touch this without SERIOUS work to ensure everything I used was actually OGC.

Ryan