More info about this OSRIC thing?

[T. Foster]

I must confess that I have no idea why half-elf and halfling druids weren't allowed in OSRIC, since they are explicitly allowed in the AD&D PH (the former as PCs, the latter as NPCs). My guess is that it was done deliberately as some sort of "legal monkeywrench" so that the designers can point out that OSRIC's various class/race combos are not in fact a direct reproduction of AD&D's, and if that's the reasoning then I can understand and appreciate it, but I still don't like it. It's for reasons like this that I'd never consider OSRIC as a viable substitute for AD&D as my rule-system of choice. However, if I were writing an OSRIC-compatible module (something I have no plans to do at present, but who knows what the future may hold) I could, presumably, resolve this issue by "accidentally on purpose" misinterpreting the OSRIC rules and allowing half-elf and/or halfling druids -- yeah, I made a mistake, one that would be disavowed by the authors of OSRIC, but that's the price of an open license -- people will make mistakes.

(As for the separate issue of halflings in OSRIC being underpowered compared to other races, that was always the case in OD&D and AD&D1, except as thieves. If you chose to play a halfling fighter you were doing it because that's the role you wanted to play (probably you'd just re-read LotR and wanted to be Merry ) and you should have no illusions that you're not playing a severely limited character.)

 

[sjmiller]

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...

But the thing is, many of these "options" were part of the original "core rules" and were not part of any expansion. Sure, someone could do this, and I just might have to, since I find it silly to exclude and obfuscate for no readily discernable reason.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Sure, someone could do this, and I just might have to, since I find it silly to exclude and obfuscate for no readily discernable reason.

You're very welcome to do so. If you do, I'll look forward to reading your supplement!

Henry: "Excavated Magic" had me rolling in the aisles.

 

[Ourph]

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 .... :\

By my reading of the OSRIC license, authors who want to claim their product is "OSRIC compatible" are actually under no obligation to make sure their product is actually following all of the rules in the OSRIC document. In fact, if I'm understanding the rules of the OSRIC Open License correctly, as long as your product is not a complete game you could create a module for Call of Cthulhu 2nd edition (a completely unrelated system) and indicate OSRIC compatibility if you wanted to, as long as you complied with all of the rules in the OGL and OSRIC licenses (including not violating any of Chaosium's IP).

 

[Mythmere1]

I am hoping that OSRIC fosters modules and supplements in which the author of the supplement "breaks" the rules (substituting a formula or probability curve or creative resolution) in a way that's specific to the module.

The world is the GM's oyster, a blank slate. When the author of a module pinch hits, to give the GM a creative nudge, the world is the author's oyster until the GM takes over.

This approach harkens back to the early days of the game when rules provided little constraint to the GM's creativity; they merely provided a universal platform to define and structure an imaginative game. OSRIC is designed to maximize the creative potential of the resource-writer.

What does that have to do with half-elf druids? Well, it would have if the little "speeches" I wrote into my original versions had stayed in the document. I tried to push this game philosophy in the text of the document, and these were rightly taken out later by P&P. Such matters of opinion don't belong in a system document. The OSRIC philosophy (which now not explicitly stated in the document itself) is to take a very spartan system as the platform and let writers of every game-philosophy, every writing-style, every walk of fantasy fandom ... go to town with it.

Hence, it's not that this has much to do with questions of half-elven druids ... it's that questions of half elven druids have little to do with OSRIC. No one is actually going to sit down and generate a character from OSRIC (and if they do, there's still a GM to say, "sure, make a half-elven druid"). And if the author of a module chooses to put in a half-elven druid, who's to say he's wrong? A system document isn't a set of game rules: it's the PART of a game that's made universally available as a standard for writers.

OSRIC is all about removing constraints on our collective creativity. Not only is this reflected in the OSRIC open license, but it's also woven tightly into the philosophy of the document itself. I have always seen 1e as being as free-form as the Holmes Basic set I started RPGing with, but with more imagination-resources wrapped into the books. I shot for that target (well, I aimed and pulled the bow a bit - Stuart finished pulling the bow and actually made the shot ).

 

[Akrasia]

Maybe it doesn't include Unearthed Arcana?

Cheers,
Cam

Check out page 14 of a certain Players’ Handbook. Half-elf druids predate UA by 8 years.

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 allowing half-elf druids is part of the 'core rules' of at least one well-known OOP game!

It seems as core/'non-variant' as anything else, AFAIK.

... My guess is that it was done deliberately as some sort of "legal monkeywrench" so that the designers can point out that OSRIC's various class/race combos are not in fact a direct reproduction of AD&D's, and if that's the reasoning then I can understand and appreciate it, but I still don't like it...

That seems plausible. And I agree in disliking the move -- half-elf druids are as much a part of a certain ‘first edition’ game as gnome illusionist-thieves (at least for me).

This is a trivial issue, obviously, but little things like this in OSRIC make me scratch my head. If I ever write an OSRIC product, I'll suspect that I will be making quite a few 'mistakes' .

 

[Ranger REG]

IOW, you're just providing a hammer. It's up to the "craftsman" to make something creative and functional using that hammer.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

IOW, you're just providing a hammer. It's up to the "craftsman" to make something creative and functional using that hammer.

Bingo! That's it in a nutshell.

 

[dagger]

I think he mentioned Unearthed Arcana because that allowed Half-elf's to be Ranger/Druids for the first time.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

I think he mentioned Unearthed Arcana because that allowed Half-elf's to be Ranger/Druids for the first time.

Yeah, what's with that? In 1e and OSRIC, druids have to be True Neutral and rangers have to be good-aligned. So ranger/druid's obviously an impossible combination, precluded by alignment.