More info about this OSRIC thing?

[Philotomy Jurament]

...I believe that most of the people who bought the first OSRIC adventure, Pod Caverns of the Sinister Shroom, also purchased Rob Kuntz' COTSK...

That describes me, as well. I run a C&C campaign, and I've ordered several recent 1E and OSRIC offerings: Cairn of the Skeleton King, Pod Caverns of the Sinister Shroom, and Iron Crypt of the Heretics. On the strength of Cairn... I also pre-ordered Tower of Blood.

 

[Akrasia]

...
The Trolls are not going to license just anyone to produce material for their game, and licenses cost big money. Someone might be able to retain control of their project by obtaining such a license, but its going to cost and the Trolls must give permission. And that means that, ultimately, the Trolls have a big say in who can publish C&C material, and thus alot of control over anyone who wants to professionally produce game material with C&C on the cover...

I never denied the fact that one would have to get TLG's permission in order to publish C&C material (and had you read my post with proper attention you would realise this). I merely objected to your claims that one would invariably have to surrender control over one's products to TLG, or that TLG was somehow not paying its writers adequately (the latter seemed to be implied in what you said).

...
Well, I could say that the C&C crowd are a prickly lot, but what's the point in either of us getting all fired up and defensive about this?..

Please don't assume that I am part of any particular 'crowd'. I happen to support both C&C and OSRIC, and find attempts to draw up 'sides' over such things silly and immature.

... they won't retain the rights to their work (whether done through TLG or a third party), and they need the Troll's permission to do so in the first place...

Ummm, one can produce material for C&C and retain control of one's product -- if one gains permission from TLG to do so (for example, Mishler's new Wilderlands material, which simply refutes your claim).

With OSRIC, an author is guaranteed to retain the rights to their work (unless they sell them for some reason), and they need no permission to use the OSRIC rules or the trademark.

Yes, and that is fine. Why the need to make incorrect claims about another system in order to appreciate this virtue of OSRIC?

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

For those who liked Pod Caverns, look out for an announcement from Expeditious Retreat Press shortly. I think I'm safe to say that Pod Caverns has gone off to the printer, and I understand that Joe Browning already has another complete manuscript in the editing phase.

 

[Akrasia]

Let's not derail the thread into a discussion of C&C. It's nice to have a place to discuss OSRIC.

I didn't read this until after I replied to John Stark (whose post I found patronising and incorrect). So my apologies for pursuing a tangent.

Suffice to say, I echo others' sentiments that OSRIC and C&C should not be understood as rivals, but rather as mutually-reinforcing lines of products.

 

[Mythmere1]

I didn't read this until after I replied to John Stark (whose post I found patronising and incorrect). So my apologies for pursuing a tangent.

Suffice to say, I echo others' sentiments that OSRIC and C&C should not be understood as rivals, but rather as mutually-reinforcing lines of products.

Tangents happen, I'm hardly innocent on that count.

And I strongly agree that the two systems will support each other in forming the niche market for OOP-type resources. Right now, the key is to get that niche market going at all. Eventually, of course, competition will develop: that's the nature of a market. But again, that competition will be good for ALL the gamers as long as it's competition to produce the best products. "Edition wars," badmouthing, and backstabbing between companies or fans would hurt that market and all the gamers, and there's certainly a tendency toward that kind of behavior for some reason. But all in all, the more positive, quality-based competition that develops, the better for us all. And the more open the system, the more room there is for positive, rather than negative, competition to produce the best products FOR THE GAMERS.

 

[Akrasia]

Regarding the content of the OSRIC rules: Why are half-elves barred from being druids?

It seems strange that, if I were to write a module appropriate for a 'certain OOP game' that explicitly allows half-elf druids, and included a half-elf druid NPC within my module, I could not then claim that my module was 'OSRIC compatible'.

Just wondering .... :\

 

[Cam Banks]

Regarding the content of the OSRIC rules: Why are half-elves barred from being druids?

Maybe it doesn't include Unearthed Arcana?

Cheers,
Cam

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Regarding the content of the OSRIC rules: Why are half-elves barred from being druids?

It seems strange that, if I were to write a module appropriate for a 'certain OOP game' that explicitly allows half-elf druids, and included a half-elf druid NPC within my module, I could not then claim that my module was 'OSRIC compatible'.

Just wondering .... :\

Not all the possible variant rules from OOP games were (or could be) included, and there are therefore some restrictions which would seem anomalous to people who use certain expansions.

But I'm expecting some, ah, misunderstandings of the OSRIC rules to take place. For example, in OSRIC itself, there's a concept of decimal strength where a character might have a strength of 18.76. Some scenario designers might accidentally misunderstand this and refer to a percentile strength or write the stat as "18/76." Equally, a scenario designer might accidentally forget that half-elf druids don't happen in OSRIC and inadvertently include a half-elf druid in a purportedly OSRIC-compatible document.

I don't condone this, of course.

 

[sjmiller]

Not all the possible variant rules from OOP games were (or could be) included, and there are therefore some restrictions which would seem anomalous to people who use certain expansions.

The only problem with making this "change" is that it is entirely unexpected, and in this case is limiting for no apparent reason. Half-elves and druids have gone together from the beginning of RPGs, if I am not mistaken. To remove that option now makes no sense at all.

It is almost as bad as adding clerical classes to every race except for halflings. As they currently stand, Halflings are the most restricted race in OSRIC. You can be a halfling thief all you want, there's no restriction. You can be a halfling fighter, but only if you don't mind stopping at 4th level. Otherwise you can be a fighter/thief, but you are again restricted in your fighter progression. Wow, who would want to be a halfling if those are your choices. At least giving them the druid option, just as all the other races were given a cleric/druid option, would make it a bit more tolerable to use halflings.

 

[Henry]

...Wow, who would want to be a halfling if those are your choices. At least giving them the druid option, just as all the other races were given a cleric/druid option, would make it a bit more tolerable to use halflings.

Be careful, Steve; that way lies 3rd edition...

More seriously, for modules and the like I doubt it would make a difference, but I could definitely see a sourcebook that expanded character choices that was compatible with OSRIC, like, I dunno, Excavated Magic...