OSR What's more important for a retroclone?

[Sacrosanct]

What do you think is more important to a retroclone of TSR era D&D?

1. Rules
the mechanics and rules should stick without new changes. THAC0, races, classes, level limits, spells, etc. Think OSE or OSRIC but without the ascending AC options

2. The feel of the game
Shadowdark is a good example. It does a great job capturing the feel of the game--grit, danger, simple classes and progression, but offers wildly different rules (how spells work, XP, ability checks, etc.)

 

[overgeeked]

To me, a retroclone is defined by copying the rules of an older game as closely as possible. Like Old-School Essentials.

There are plenty of great games out there that copy the feel of the old-school games, but they're not retroclones. Like Shadowdark.

 

[Reynard]

To me, a retroclone is defined by copying the rules of an older game as closely as possible. Like Old-School Essentials.

There are plenty of great games out there that copy the feel of the old-school games, but they're not retroclones. Like Shadowdark.

^^^This.

That said, a good game that embraces the ethos and feel of an older game is pretty great, too.

 

[Nikosandros]

I agree. A clone, by definition is a copy, so it has to be as close as possible to the original while offering clarifications and better organization and accessibility. Games inspired by the spirit of older games can be wonderful, of course. They simply are not clones.

Ascending AC, on the other hand, is mathematically equivalent to descending. So, while I personally prefer descending when playing older editions of D&D, I don't really see ascending AC as a change in the rules.

 

[overgeeked]

I would not say the retroclone has to be exactly the same. There absolutely is wiggle room for some slight changes. Flipping AC, for example. Just about every game that’s recognizable as a retroclone has some rules changes. Most are house rules the creator’s table plays with to make things smoother and easier.

 

[Jahydin]

If the intent is to be a retroclone, then the only deviations from the original should be to:

• Avoid legal issues
• Clear up an ambiguous or contradictory ruling
• Insert official errata that was printed elsewhere

 

[TiQuinn]

Name “retroclone” aside, I’d prefer something that captures the spirit of the game, otherwise I’d just play the original game or one of the existing clones like OSRIC that’s been out for years.

 

[howandwhy99]

The highly particular rules and the subjective feel of the simulation are nowhere near as important as the actual school of game - the Strategic Sim game hidden behind the screen and gamed in one's imagination.
If you're not playing to score points, you're not really comprehending RPGs for the first 25 years. Storytelling and character expression aren't really part of the hobby. Best to remove any conceptions from narrative theory as possible.
That's the actual RPG hobby.

 

[TiQuinn]

If you're not playing to score points, you're not really comprehending RPGs for the first 25 years. Storytelling and character expression aren't really part of the hobby. Best to remove any conceptions from narrative theory as possible.

I can argue the opposite and say that you’re not comprehending the last 25 years.

 

[Reynard]

If the intent is to be a retroclone, then the only deviations from the original should be to:

• Avoid legal issues
• Clear up an ambiguous or contradictory ruling
• Insert official errata that was printed elsewhere

Also, the point at the beginning was not to sell the retroclone, but to have a foundation on which people could support the original game. In the time since OSRIC, the retroclones have become products of their own. Which may be good or bad, depending on one's view, but it is a shift.