OSRIC -- update

[Mycanid]

Hooray!

THIS is good news to be sure....

 

[RFisher]

I've been reading Osric recently (I'd only really skimmed it before) & I have to once again say how impressed I am. Having something as close as legally possible to the old game but freed (at least, in a sense) from intellectual property bondage is pleasing. Your navigation of the legalities even has a certain pleasing aesthetic of its own.

Osric's success so far in its main purpose--to ease the publication of first edition compatible material--is impressive.

But you know what the most surprising part is? Osric feels more like AD&D to me than AD&D itself. With its omissions, simplifications, & ambiguities; it is closer to the game I used to play than what those hardbacks on my shelf describe. Sure, I'll always have a special place in my heart for Gygax's words, & there is much--in the DMG in particular--to supplement the game. My preference may currently like with B/X D&D, but Osric actually tempts me to try AD&D again. (Or some unholy combination of classic D&D & AD&D.)

So, kudos again to all involved.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Will it include Unearthed Arcana classes?

Unearthed Arcana does significantly change the feel of the game, and we've semi-ignored it so far. (I've always thought of UA as 1.5e.) There's a nod to it in the optional weapon specialisation rules, but that's about it.

I have no short-term plans to expand the OSRIC core rules to include Unearthed Arcana -- but of course, other people are completely free to do that, and I would welcome such conversions.

I would certainly like OSRIC to include the whole 1e canon eventually, with the UA stuff as optional rules so it can be easily ignored by those who prefer vanilla 1e.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

But you know what the most surprising part is? Osric feels more like AD&D to me than AD&D itself. With its omissions, simplifications, & ambiguities; it is closer to the game I used to play than what those hardbacks on my shelf describe.

*blushes profusely*

Words like this really do mean a lot to me. Thank you!

 

[AnthonyRoberson]

Unearthed Arcana does significantly change the feel of the game, and we've semi-ignored it so far. (I've always thought of UA as 1.5e.) There's a nod to it in the optional weapon specialisation rules, but that's about it...

Thank God. UA DID change the game and not for the better. I do like weapon specialization, however, and thanks for including it. Like someone else said, OSRIC feels more like my 'perfect' version of AD&D than the actual old AD&D books...

 

[w_earle_wheeler]

I have no short-term plans to expand the OSRIC core rules to include Unearthed Arcana -- but of course, other people are completely free to do that, and I would welcome such conversions.

I hope that someone "re-balances" the stuff from UA and the "intended" classes for Gygax's 2e to match up with the 1e PHB.

 

[Particle_Man]

Technically, there are some nods to UA in OSRIC.

I think that elves, dwarves, and gnomes can be clerics as player characters in OSRIC. That was allowed in UA, but in the original PHB they were NPCs.

The reason that this is a significant change? It reduces one of the "niches" of the half-elves and half-orcs as multiclass clerics, especially since the half-races have relatively low level limits as clerics.

Just a minor nitpick.

 

[T. Foster]

Technically, there are some nods to UA in OSRIC.

I think that elves, dwarves, and gnomes can be clerics as player characters in OSRIC. That was allowed in UA, but in the original PHB they were NPCs.

The reason that this is a significant change? It reduces one of the "niches" of the half-elves and half-orcs as multiclass clerics, especially since the half-races have relatively low level limits as clerics.

Just a minor nitpick.

The level limits for demi-human clerics given in OSRIC still match the PH, though (level limits for demi-human clerics were significantly higher in UA). I suspect allowing PC demi-human clerics was probably done for legal reasons -- that declaring certain classes "NPC only" was felt to veer too far in the direction of the "artistic representation" landmine.

 

[sjmiller]

The level limits for demi-human clerics given in OSRIC still match the PH, though (level limits for demi-human clerics were significantly higher in UA). I suspect allowing PC demi-human clerics was probably done for legal reasons -- that declaring certain classes "NPC only" was felt to veer too far in the direction of the "artistic representation" landmine.

Except that the Halflings were stripped of clerics completely. In AD&D1e they got NPC clerics like the other races. Those NPC cleric restrictions were removed for the other races, but halfling were not given any ability to be a cleric or a druid. If I get the chance to work on the OSRIC stuff I was planning (darn thing called life got in the way), that is one of the first things I will change.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Except that the Halflings were stripped of clerics completely. In AD&D1e they got NPC clerics like the other races. Those NPC cleric restrictions were removed for the other races, but halfling were not given any ability to be a cleric or a druid. If I get the chance to work on the OSRIC stuff I was planning (darn thing called life got in the way), that is one of the first things I will change.

Actually that was down to me. Matt Finch's original draft permitted halflings to be druids, and I changed that -- I felt that halflings should not be able to be druids for flavour reasons.

Having said that, it's easy enough for any GM to change or lift the restrictions.