Any thoughts on OSRIC and Labyrinth Lord?

[Traveller]

I've got OD&D, B/X D&D, and AD&D sitting on my bookshelf. 2E I have sitting in one of my storage boxes. I don't need a clone system, not when I have a version of the originals that I'd want to play sitting in my signature. That version has a target market of one: me.

The stated goal of one of the clone systems is to make it easier to publish AD&D compatible material. With Castles & Crusades, you can publish AD&D compatible material, but just like the clone systems, you can't claim compatibility to AD&D. To the best of my knowledge, there's only two things that need to be converted between the two systems: armor class and movement. In fact, converting movement can be ignored if you want and it still works. Therefore, the clone systems are as I labeled them: a solution in search of a problem.

Of course the fanboys of one particular clone system will never accept that. They didn't the first time I said it, and there's no reason for things to change. After all, it's much easier to spew out lies, malicious insults, half-truths and threats, than it is to actually grow up.

I love the Dungeons & Dragons game system, in all the flavors I described in my initial paragraph. If I didn't, I wouldn't have spent three years assembling my own version of the rule system for my own use. Yet, the one inescapable truth that I have accepted that the clone system fanboys can never accept is this.

OD&D and AD&D's days as a major force in gaming are over.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

[maasenstodt]

Julian Grimm wrote:
However I found C&C. I found a game that had that feel but better and more logical mechanics, easily usable with my 2e collection and I didn't have to try to teach the quirky AD&D mechanics to my wife and kids. Say what you want about unified mechanics but they do make the game easier to play and run.

I agree with your general sentiment, but to be fair, comprehending the un-unified rules of Labyrinth Lord aren't going to pose much of a problem for many players. There are plenty of other games out there that are worth playing with far more complicated systems than any of those we're discussing here.

Julian Grimm wrote:
Ideas like Osric and LL are fine for those that don't want to move to easier more logical systems but personally, all bad blood aside, I don't see the point in their creation. I know they want to keep what is a print dead system going but in all honesty how far do they intend to penitrate a market that has moved past that era?

C&C is a great game with a great, coherent mechanic. That said, I don't think it's more logical than LL. Tastes for game mechanics vary, and no one preference is more logical than another. It's wonderful that we have as many options available as we do!

With regards to their reason for being, I think it's wonderful once again that people are so moved to (re)create these games, whether for financial gain, personal satisfaction, or a combination of the two. I think looking at them in terms of "penetrating a market" may be missing the point, and I don't see how their "era has passed." All of that, it seems to me, is projecting one's views in a way perhaps similar to how certain people unfortunately approached C&C.

I enjoy C&C, LL, and OSRIC-based products. I'm glad that I never got involved in the pointless battles of the past, but would hope that even had I done so, I wouldn't hold accountable those not directly responsible for poor behavior.
_________________
Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? -- Henry David Thoreau

[aethelulf22]

Logic doesn't always play a part in an individuals reason for buying something. Personal taste, nostalgia, desire for simplicity, adding to a collection, great cover, nice layout, whim...all play a part to varying degrees. Luckily there is enough room in in the world of RPGs for lots of variety and just because you like one system that thankfully doesn't mean you have to exclude all others.

Me...I also have the original OD&D and AD&D stuff...I also have a lot of C&C stuff, OSRIC stuff and LL stuff....I like it all. I also really like that it is interchangeable. Why do I buy into it all? For all of the reasons I stated above. But mainly because as I get older...I find I'm looking more and more for simplicity in rules...a less intrusive ruleset that leaves decisions to me and commonsense and where I don't have to worry whether the players are going to throw the rulebook back at me when make a ruling. I also have SW and HEx...other systems that have gone the rules lite way...and I enjoy them, too.

Am I such a unusual case in the RPG market? I don't think so...the market is made up of a great variety of individuals (very few gamers will have just one rulebook sitting on their shelves) and differing tastes. There is surely room for all types and all motivations...there is no need to declare your allegiance to one system only and battle against the rest! And if the publishers are doing it purely as a fan thing with no real intention of making a thriving business out of it...well all the better for us fans who want more...more...more! Otherwise their contributions to this great game may never have been produced.

[adaen]

With regard to rules light games. To me it is quite clear that AD&D is not a rules light system (I'd say it is rules moderate). I think the appeal to many of AD&D is based around where its rules are focused (and where they are not).
_________________
~Adaen of Bridgewater, www.highadventuregames.com

[aethelulf22]

adaen wrote:
With regard to rules light games. To me it is quite clear that AD&D is not a rules light system (I'd say it is rules moderate). I think the appeal to many of AD&D is based around where its rules are focused (and where they are not).

Agreed. Which is why my re-discovery of Basic/Expert/OD&D through Labyrinth Lord (and BFRpg and Swords and Wizardry) has me so excited...its simplicity as well as its familiarity is a joy but it also has the added bonus that it is pretty interchangeable with AD&D, OSRIC and C&C.

[Matthew]

adaen wrote:
With regard to rules light games. To me it is quite clear that AD&D is not a rules light system (I'd say it is rules moderate). I think the appeal to many of AD&D is based around where its rules are focused (and where they are not).

It depends which version of AD&D you are talking about. AD&D 2e has a very "light" default rules set, mainly because it is a deconstruction of AD&D 1e. It is not a game with a "light" outlook (i.e. it made no attempt to remain "light"), but it parallels BD&D in that way.
_________________
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after ones own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350)

[Treebore]

aethelulf22 wrote:
... but it also has the added bonus that it is pretty interchangeable with AD&D, OSRIC and C&C.

Thats why I love C&C. I love the SIEGE mechanic, and I love how it also allows me to so easily use what I like most about each edition of the game. Essentially a "Dream come true" scenario for me.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Barrataria]

gideon_thorne wrote:
Sure, folks can make a few dollars a year, but its not a sustainable model for a real business. Its devolved into a 'cottage' industry, where hobbyists can do it as an on the side deal, but don't expect to make any money at it.

I don't think I agree with the view that low-cost/no-cost products are somehow "devolution". Before they became "products" and "inventory" these games were all just a bunch of guys in a basement with pencils, papers, and sandtrays (and maybe a sack of plastic monsters from a toy store or weird educational dice). Made, if you will, by "hobbyists" for other "hobbyists".

I don't think that a writer/publisher/artist's lack of a profit motive necessarily indicates anything about the inherent worth of the product of their efforts. There are plenty of examples from the 3E era and TSR's vaults that prove beyond a doubt that the pricetag on a product (or the profit margin of a particular publisher) does not indicate product quality in and of itself. Firefox isn't a worse browser than IE because it's free. You might hate it, or hate the people at Mozilla, but that's not evidence that FF is inferior or a "devolution".

I don't think Gary spent a lot of time wondering how running a game on his porch would make him a fortune. He never sent me an invoice for the questions he answered over the years. Rob Kuntz and Steve Marsh have made great suggestions via email at different points over the years. That made me respect each of them more, not less.

To the extent these things result in more modules and rule add-ons for players and GMs to sift through, at no or low cost, to find something to help them run a game, that seems to me to be an absolute good. You're definitely right that these things won't make money- anyone paying for their artwork will never recoup that expenditure, especially where releasing free downloads. It's my money to waste, dagnabit
But I'd like to think that the lack of profit motive might, in certain circumstances, be at least as conducive to production of decent gaming materials as the business judgment rule has been for the for-profit game producers.

BB

PS. When I've viewed Picasso or Gauguin exhibitions, I've had many thoughts, but "he must have caught a case of 'gay' from painting all these female forms" was never one.

[Treebore]

Barrataria wrote:
I don't think I agree with the view that low-cost/no-cost products are somehow "devolution". Before they became "products" and "inventory" these games were all just a bunch of guys in a basement with pencils, papers, and sandtrays (and maybe a sack of plastic monsters from a toy store or weird educational dice). Made, if you will, by "hobbyists" for other "hobbyists".

I don't think that a writer/publisher/artist's lack of a profit motive necessarily indicates anything about the inherent worth of the product of their efforts. There are plenty of examples from the 3E era and TSR's vaults that prove beyond a doubt that the pricetag on a product (or the profit margin of a particular publisher) does not indicate product quality in and of itself. Firefox isn't a worse browser than IE because it's free. You might hate it, or hate the people at Mozilla, but that's not evidence that FF is inferior or a "devolution".

I don't think Gary spent a lot of time wondering how running a game on his porch would make him a fortune. He never sent me an invoice for the questions he answered over the years. Rob Kuntz and Steve Marsh have made great suggestions via email at different points over the years. That made me respect each of them more, not less.

To the extent these things result in more modules and rule add-ons for players and GMs to sift through, at no or low cost, to find something to help them run a game, that seems to me to be an absolute good. You're definitely right that these things won't make money- anyone paying for their artwork will never recoup that expenditure, especially where releasing free downloads. It's my money to waste, dagnabit
But I'd like to think that the lack of profit motive might, in certain circumstances, be at least as conducive to production of decent gaming materials as the business judgment rule has been for the for-profit game producers.

BB

PS. When I've viewed Picasso or Gauguin exhibitions, I've had many thoughts, but "he must have caught a case of 'gay' from painting all these female forms" was never one.

Yeah, I don't use OSRIC, or LL, I just use their modules.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[maasenstodt]

Traveller wrote:
Therefore, the clone systems are as I labeled them: a solution in search of a problem.

If for no other reason than the fact that Dan Proctor wanted to make it possible for me to have two beautiful hardcover copies of Labyrinth Lord that make it easier for me to play B/X D&D, your analysis is wrong.

Traveller wrote:
Yet, the one inescapable truth that I have accepted that the clone system fanboys can never accept is this.

OD&D and AD&D's days as a major force in gaming are over.

I think LL is a very nice piece of work, I like a number of great OSRIC products, and I'm eagerly awaiting Swords & Wizardry. Yet, I really don't care about this "major force in gaming" notion. It's never really entered my mind and, at least for most of the fans I communicate with on various forums, it doesn't seem relevant for many others either.

What is relevant is that these efforts are strengthening existing gaming communities, fostering the release of new products, and making efforts to give more options to prospective gamers. Did you know that Labyrinth Lord is now available through Amazon, BN, and other book sellers? How cool is that?
I understand that, unfortunately, hurt feelings exist between some individuals. I also understand that not everyone is going to like every gaming effort out there, whether it's D&D, LL, or C&C. That's perfectly OK. It's pretty hard, however, for me to see any logical reason for harboring a bad attitude towards these games themselves. Simply put, people exercising their talents and providing greater variety in the marketplace is something to be celebrated.
_________________
Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? -- Henry David Thoreau

[aethelulf22]

maasenstodt wrote:
Yet, I really don't care about this "major force in gaming" notion. It's never really entered my mind and, at least for most of the fans I communicate with on various forums, it doesn't seem relevant for many others either.

What is relevant is that these efforts are strengthening existing gaming communities, fostering the release of new products, and making efforts to give more options to prospective gamers.

Absolutely!

maasenstodt wrote:
Simply put, people exercising their talents and providing greater variety in the marketplace is something to be celebrated.

Absolutely!

maasenstodt wrote:
If for no other reason than the fact that Dan Proctor wanted to make it possible for me to have two beautiful hardcover copies of Labyrinth Lord that make it easier for me to play B/X D&D, your analysis is wrong.

And absolutely!

[gideon_thorne]

Barrataria wrote:
I don't think I agree with the view that low-cost/no-cost products are somehow "devolution". Before they became "products" and "inventory" these games were all just a bunch of guys in a basement with pencils, papers, and sandtrays (and maybe a sack of plastic monsters from a toy store or weird educational dice). Made, if you will, by "hobbyists" for other "hobbyists".

But the original TSR crew intended to make money at it. Perhaps they didn't expect as much money as eventually came about. But any of that crew will tell you, there was expected to be a significant return on their investment.

And I don't believe I mentioned the word 'devolution'. I said, there's no profit in it. And has been clearly proved without a doubt, there isn't.

Quote:
I don't think that a writer/publisher/artist's lack of a profit motive necessarily indicates anything about the inherent worth of the product of their efforts. There are plenty of examples from the 3E era and TSR's vaults that prove beyond a doubt that the pricetag on a product (or the profit margin of a particular publisher) does not indicate product quality in and of itself. Firefox isn't a worse browser than IE because it's free. You might hate it, or hate the people at Mozilla, but that's not evidence that FF is inferior or a "devolution".

Nor did I suggest that. I just wont deal with that particular product label because of an opinion of mine over the inherent lack of worth over a certain group of folks. Nor did I use the word 'devolution'.

Quote:
I don't think Gary spent a lot of time wondering how running a game on his porch would make him a fortune. He never sent me an invoice for the questions he answered over the years. Rob Kuntz and Steve Marsh have made great suggestions via email at different points over the years. That made me respect each of them more, not less.

Probably not. But Gary and Rob in particular have made no bones about the fact that they were in it for the money.

Quote:
To the extent these things result in more modules and rule add-ons for players and GMs to sift through, at no or low cost, to find something to help them run a game, that seems to me to be an absolute good. You're definitely right that these things won't make money- anyone paying for their artwork will never recoup that expenditure, especially where releasing free downloads. It's my money to waste, dagnabit
But I'd like to think that the lack of profit motive might, in certain circumstances, be at least as conducive to production of decent gaming materials as the business judgment rule has been for the for-profit game producers.

BB

PS. When I've viewed Picasso or Gauguin exhibitions, I've had many thoughts, but "he must have caught a case of 'gay' from painting all these female forms" was never one.

Your right, it is your money to waste. As it is my time not working on such things and my money to save not spending on such things.
And I'd doubt the mental health of anyone viewing a Picasso and finding a sexy female form in there. Same with a Degas.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[gideon_thorne]

maasenstodt wrote:
It's pretty hard, however, for me to see any logical reason for harboring a bad attitude towards these games themselves. Simply put, people exercising their talents and providing greater variety in the marketplace is something to be celebrated.

Oh, there's much logic to be had. The most obvious one being, 'vote with your wallet.' If an individual or a group has, at its core, an attitude one cant in good conscience support, why pass on your hard earned dollars? $$ = reward in the publishing business. And I see no logical reason to reward a bad attitude.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[maasenstodt]

gideon_thorne wrote:
If an individual or a group has, at its core, an attitude one cant in good conscience support, why pass on your hard earned dollars? $$ = reward in the publishing business. And I see no logical reason to reward a bad attitude.

Good point. If I thought purchasing a product would significantly reinforce behavior I consider bad, I'd think twice as well.

That said, how far do you carry guilt by association? If some of the proponents of OSRIC irk you, does that mean you rule out looking at a third party Labyrinth Lord product? I'm not suggesting that you should purchase something along those lines... just asking a question.
_________________
Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? -- Henry David Thoreau

[Fiffergrund]

Quote:
That said, how far do you carry guilt by association? If some of the proponents of OSRIC irk you, does that mean you rule out looking at a third party Labyrinth Lord product? I'm not suggesting that you should purchase something along those lines... just asking a question.

I can't speak for Peter, but I carry it as far as I need to be consistent with my conscience. For me, that's all the way.
_________________
Sir Fiffergrund, Lord Marshal of the Castle and Crusade Society.

He Who Hides Behind The Elephant's Back

[Dan Proctor]

maasenstodt wrote:
That said, how far do you carry guilt by association? If some of the proponents of OSRIC irk you, does that mean you rule out looking at a third party Labyrinth Lord product? I'm not suggesting that you should purchase something along those lines... just asking a question.

As I've stated in several places, I wasn't around when all of the blood was spilled regarding OSRIC and TLG, and associated parties. I've tried very, very hard to foster good will and not be divisive, but nonetheless I can't seem to stop people from automatically grouping myself and Labyrinth Lord with the bad blood surrounding OSRIC.

The only thing I have left to say to this is that people who were dumbfounded by the negativity they received by fringe "old-school" radicals might consider taking a step back when they group me with these people. To simply throw me in there is treatment that is no more logical or fair than treatment you received.

:sigh: but I've already come to realize that I can't do anything about this. I'll just go on about my business, and let my words and actions speak for themselves. For the record I think that no matter what game you play, having fun is all that is important. I don't follow the "one true system" idea; even more importantly, I don't follow the idea that these games should lead to name calling or so much angst.

As for my efforts being "fringe," so what? It is my effort and money to "waste." There is nothing wrong with publishing as a hobby. This is just one other way I receive enjoyment from gaming in general, and if anyone wants to criticize me for working on projects that may well never have a big fan base, I can only counter that criticism by saying that I am doing something I love. If someone wants to look down on me for that, it isn't my problem.

[maasenstodt]

Well spoken, Dan.
_________________
Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? -- Henry David Thoreau

[Treebore]

Look on the bright side Dan, there are several people here who don't let "bad feelings" stop them.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Traveller]

maasenstodt wrote:
If for no other reason than the fact that Dan Proctor wanted to make it possible for me to have two beautiful hardcover copies of Labyrinth Lord that make it easier for me to play B/X D&D, your analysis is wrong.

Ok, before I get into this, I want to make something abundantly clear. Opinions are not wrong, and it's very antagonistic to declare that someone's opinion is wrong simply because that opinion is objectionable.

With that said, here we go.

I'm sorry, but the last time I checked, about five minutes ago, there were four copies of the Dungeons & Dragons Rules Cyclopedia available, three of them at very reasonable prices. Now that's a beautiful hardcover, one that I'm very happy to own. Also, at this time, there are thirty-one copies of the basic rule book available as well as sixteen copies of the expert rules on ebay, give or take one or two of each. Ebay makes it possible for me, if I wanted, to own beautiful copies of all these books, and not be burdened by my conscience telling me that I'm supporting the very people who were desperate enough to try and silence me using threats. Those three books right there make it very easy for me to play B/X D&D, and if worst came to worst, I can buy them as PDFs.

Furthermore, my assertion that the clone games are a solution in search of a problem is based on very simple logic: the original game materials exist and are still readily available in printed form. At worst, they're available as PDFs. In addition, it is actually possible to create AD&D compatible material utilizing the SRD, without needing additional licensing or tool kits, as Pied Piper Publishing announced on their message boards some time ago. Since it is still feasable to create new material for any of those systems without referencing either clone game, the clone games are a solution in search of a problem.

Now that I've got that out of my system, your claim that these systems strengthen gamining communities is based upon what? I've not seen LL's community, so I can't comment on that one, but I haven't seen any strengthening of the gaming community in general, only a fracturing, caused by a rabid few fanboys of the big O who could not comprehend that their game's day is over.

I'm happy that LL is available through Barnes & Noble et al. I don't know if I've made it plain enough, but for both you and Dan, in a nutshell, my beef is with the big O and its fanboys, not LL. If I've said things that run contrary to the intent of keeping the focus on the big O, then I'm sorry.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

[gideon_thorne]

Fiffergrund wrote:
I can't speak for Peter, but I carry it as far as I need to be consistent with my conscience. For me, that's all the way.

Thats a good answer. Carry it as far as your conscience dictates. As I mentioned previously, everyone else is free to do as they wish. I believe I've made my stance abundantly clear.

I'm quite a reasonable person the majority of the time, but even I can draw a line in the sand and say "Here I Stand. Here I stand; I can do no other."
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[Tadhg]

I'd like to go on record to say that I very much support Dan Proctor and Labyrinth Lord and all their products.

He's a stand up guy who I have the great pleasure to meet and game with at Gary Gygax's house.

He runs a great website that is friendly, fun and informational.

His products are eminently usable with C&C and/or O/BD&D.

I've mentioned his Mutant Future and David Bezio's Phoenix Barony in other threads around here and elsewhere. Top notch stuff.

Stop by his site and check out some the great stuff being developed and talked about ~ I think you will be quite pleased:
http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/goblinoidgames.html

_________________
Count Rhuveinus - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Franqueforte

"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax

"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth

[Fiffergrund]

For the record, I want to make very clear that when I remark about certain negative events, I have very specific individuals in mind, even if just as internet screennames. Dan is not, and has never been, one of those individuals.

I have no intention of slandering anyone, or of lumping anyone into a group irrationally.

Anyone reading my posts can see exactly where my problem lies. Anyone using that community as a staging point for ideas, marketing, or distribution associates with that behavior. From my perspective, if one knows of the negative, and fails to repudiate it, that implies tacit agreement with the negative.

Why am I so strict? In a prior post, I described an individual who participated in one of my games at LGGC and then gleefully took part in a very personal bashfest. After that, I am inclined to offer very little benefit of the doubt.

If a product or person has no association with that community, then there's no problem. If there is an association, I won't consider the product fair game for my consumption until the association completely stops.

Those are my standards, and I don't expect everyone to follow them or even agree with them. That's just where I'm coming from after everything that has happened.
_________________
Sir Fiffergrund, Lord Marshal of the Castle and Crusade Society.

He Who Hides Behind The Elephant's Back

[Barrataria]

gideon_thorne wrote:
And I don't believe I mentioned the word 'devolution'.

QFT. It's in the second line.

gideon_thorne wrote:
And I'd doubt the mental health of anyone viewing a Picasso and finding a sexy female form in there.

There was a really interesting Picasso exhibit at the Met quite a few years ago now, specifically dedicated to his depiction of female forms. There was a very redundant pattern, evident through his paintings of his first wife, his first mistress/second wife, and second mistress. To completely overgeneralize, the first paintings of each woman were of a demure girl sitting on the couch. A few years would go by, and the woman would be shown as a frumpy, matronly sort. Then, stage three would feature really bizarre, abstract pictures... the best was one where his wife's head was evocative of a crab, with the whole head an angry, open, shouting mouth
I always wondered what the particular Mrs. Picasso thought when she saw herself as a huge shouting crab, while Pablo worked carefully on a nice painting of some waif
BB

[gideon_thorne]

Barrataria wrote:
QFT. It's in the second line.

Hokay then. Coming from a sensible business stand point, those who are interested in producing product for a real return on their investment aren't going to waste time with something that isn't worth the price of a doughnut.

Those who run vanity press companies, can, of course, waste time and funding on whatever they want.
Oh ya, and its certainly not an 'evolution' when folks just want to keep doing the same things over and over again. Games change, tastes change, society changes. Try to hold back the tsunami wave of change with a cocktail umbrella if people want, but don't expect not to get swept away.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[Barrataria]

Traveller wrote:
I'm sorry, but the last time I checked, about five minutes ago, there were four copies of the Dungeons & Dragons Rules Cyclopedia available, three of them at very reasonable prices.

That's good news! I need a new one. Mine is thrashed, and I believe this is in part because it is nowhere near the quality of the old AD&D books. The RC itself is 17 years old now, and there won't be pristine copies available forever because like many scarce goods it's being hoarded and because it's simply not going to hold up forever.

Traveller wrote:
Also, at this time, there are [several] copies of the basic rule book available as well as [several] copies of the expert rules on ebay, give or take one or two of each.

That's an event, because these poor things are just saddle-stitched paperbacks and have been battered terribly. In part this was because the Basic books and sets often went to children who used them as coloring books, paper doll resources, napkins, and who knows what else. The Moldvay/Cook/Marsh books are over a quarter-century old now! Steve Marsh usually can't even remember what he wrote when we ask him questions on DF Anyway, pristine copies of these are not simple to find, and some of us old coots are worrying whether the copies will hold up when we make the inevitable move into a rest home...

Traveller wrote:
if worst came to worst, I can buy them as PDFs.

Not the Moldvay/Cook/Marsh books, which are not available legally as .pdfs- those of us that are fanboys of those books have little hope they ever will be.

You can get the Mentzer books and the RC electronically as long as Hasbro allows them to be sold. Terminating that arrangement seems stupid and contrary to their business interests, but anyone from a cranky CFO to a shortsighted bankruptcy judge could do just that someday.

And that also assumes the .pdfs available aren't corrupted (which I think was the problem with the RPGNow versions for some time). If you haven't purchased them already, I would do so. Somebody with a spreadsheet somewhere might decide they need to disappear, and send a little notice to Paizo and the rest, and that's the end of that.

And make multiple backups. I have one set on a disk in a safe place in another state (yes I am paranoid).

Anyway, don't delay! Get hoarding!

[Barrataria]

gideon_thorne wrote:
Hokay then. Coming from a sensible business stand point, those who are interested in producing product for a real return on their investment aren't going to waste time with something that isn't worth the price of a doughnut.

Wait, are you saying the game industry is run from a sensible business standpoint? Six million boxes of Dragon Dice say you're wrong! Anyway as I said I don't think capitalist theory is the only lens to use to evaluate the worth of a game product.

gideon_thorne wrote:
Those who run vanity press companies, can, of course, waste time and funding on whatever they want.

The author of the Phoenix Barony has reported selling 35 copies of his LL setting book, and 59 electronic copies at a nominal charge. He reported about 100 free downloads the first week he made it available. Chris Gonnerman has distributed many, many copies of his free ruleset (http://www.basicfantasy.org/main.html) although I have no idea how many. So, if you're saying that no one but the author is interested, I don't think that's right either.

As I said, I concur completely that there's no gold in them thar hills, at least not enough for game professionals to sustain themselves in the manner to which they've become accustomed (or for outsiders to sell their way into the industry). But shame on you for calling commissioning artists a "waste of funding"! Where would the Medici be had they not had themselves painted into the last supper and whatnot If I actually manage to ever publish anything, I hope to make the artists I've paid proud to have their work attached. And I hope someone will find what I make interesting enough to use, particularly as tough economic times force gamers to spend more of their money on gas to get to a game. If not, maybe some future real-life Gamma World characters will discover my waste of time in a bunker somewhere and enjoy themselves
BB

[gideon_thorne]

Barrataria wrote:
Wait, are you saying the game industry is run from a sensible business standpoint? Six million boxes of Dragon Dice say you're wrong! Anyway as I said I don't think capitalist theory is the only lens to use to evaluate the worth of a game product.

Its the only lens that matters from a business perspective. And if someone's sold 6 million boxes of anything, well done.

I stand by what I said. Folks who are doing this for a living are doing it to make money first. Those who don't have to worry about income, ie, have another source, can have other priorities.

gideon_thorne wrote:
Those who run vanity press companies, can, of course, waste time and funding on whatever they want.

Quote:
The author of the Phoenix Barony has reported selling 35 copies of his LL setting book, and 59 electronic copies at a nominal charge. He reported about 100 free downloads the first week he made it available. Chris Gonnerman has distributed many, many copies of his free ruleset (http://www.basicfantasy.org/main.html) although I have no idea how many. So, if you're saying that no one but the author is interested, I don't think that's right either.

If I never sold more than 35 to 60 copies of a piece of my art, I'd have gone out of the art business and found a regular 9-5 decades ago.

And I sell for a fair sight more than the cost of a 'pay for cost' module. Not to mention quite a bit more than 60 copies.

As I mentioned in another thread the number of free downloads of something is meaningless. Even when folks use concepts like 'counting all the unique IPs'. Considering how many IP masks and such software is out there, the number is an illusion.

As the vanity press definition states, one is such an author if they are putting more capital into a project than they are getting out of it, and just don't care.

Quote:
As I said, I concur completely that there's no gold in them thar hills, at least not enough for game professionals to sustain themselves in the manner to which they've become accustomed (or for outsiders to sell their way into the industry). But shame on you for calling commissioning artists a "waste of funding"! Where would the Medici be had they not had themselves painted into the last supper and whatnot.

Same place they are now I imagine *looks round*.
The Medici family was a powerful and influential Florentine family from the 13th to 17th century

Note the past tense.
Considering what I generally charge, anyone asking me to do a vanity project is wasting their money. And I'll be the first to tell them so.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[Traveller]

Barrataria wrote:
*snips strawman argument*

The Dungeons & Dragons game rules do in fact exist, by your own admission. I can verify they exist in numerous forms, detailed in an earlier post of mine. It is a known fact that by the very definition of clone, the Dungeons & Dragons game must in fact be able to do anything LL or the big O can do. Since the Dungeons & Dragons rules can do anything the clone games can do, and those rules are readily available through various channels, such as ebay, used book stores, or on the Internet as PDFs, it stands to reason that nothing in your diatribe has disproved my core point: the clone games are solutions in search of a problem.

Attempting to bring the age of the existing material into the discussion is a strawman argument, since nothing lasts forever.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

[serleran]

Forever lasts forever, unless forever is nothing, and if nothing is forever, is anything now? Oh, wait, sorry, I like that argument. It reminds me why I stopped reading certain types of books... though, they are still interesting.

[Coleston the Cavalier]

serleran wrote:
Forever lasts forever, unless forever is nothing, and if nothing is forever, is anything now? Oh, wait, sorry, I like that argument. It reminds me why I stopped reading certain types of books... though, they are still interesting.

[OT}Very good Serl. I prefer the term "eternity" to forever as eternity can be understood as being outside of linear time and thus able to see and interact at all times at the same time. You probably know that already. I even have a neat chart I can draw to explain it to my church folks. [OT]

ON TOPIC

I can see no reason for this thread to continue. Everyone seems to have said their what's on their hearts. Please move on. All that going to happen here is that a bunch of people that I like may end up at each others throats.
_________________


John Adams