During my research I found that there is a small movement of fans that are still playing or have gone back to playing the original AD&D rules (1st edition) or the original D&D rules (the Basic Set). I couldn't possibly fathom why. I've done my share of studying up on the fourth edition rules and they seem awfully fun: magic users (read: wizards) can hold their own at first level, combat is much more tactical, other classes can now perform "powers" and players can feel like they are doing more than just doing swing-hit-repeat, the character classes are much more balanced than they ever have been, characters can much more easily heal after battles to continue playing the game without having to rest (or go back to town) nearly as much as per previous iterations of the rules, and pretty much everything not covered in the rule books can be adjudicated by the d20 system. So why would anyone want to go back to the original rules set?
Matthew Finch, one of the original creators of OSRIC (see below) and Swords and Wizardry, wrote A Quick Primer for Old School Gaming (download the PDF here) in which he argues for a return to old school gaming. According to his piece, it all boils down to emphasizing ROLE playing over ROLL playing. Definitely give it a read especially if you, like many others, feel like something is missing from the fourth edition rules.
Since the original rules now fall under the Open Gaming License, a number of retroclone games have been released in the past ten years including Castles & Crusades, Swords and Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, and OSRIC (a retroclone game is nearly 100% identical to the original rules they replicate but certain aspects have been altered, cleaned up, or downright fixed). Paizo Publishing, the company that used to publish Dragon Magazine, has even gotten in the act with their extremely popular Pathfinder RPG which is a cleaned up version of the 3.5 edition rules (not quite "old school gaming" in the same vein as Finch's piece, but a return to an older rules set nevertheless).
Here are three examples of some popular retroclone D&D games that are 100% free and legal to download, play, and enjoy:
Swords & Wizardry by Mythmere Games (Linkage)
Replicates the 1974 post-Chainmail original "white books" - the very roots of D&D
OSRIC (Old School Reference and Index Compilation) at Knights n Knaves (Linkage)
Replicates the 1978 First Edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons books
Labyrinth Lord by Goblinoid Games (Linkage)
Replicates the 1981 Dungeons & Dragons boxed sets
I played a lot more Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (1st and 2nd edition) than any other role playing system so I'm mostly interested in OSRIC. I even purchased a hardcover copy from Lulu because I wanted to support the movement in some way.
 |
| How some 4e gamers feel just before moving on to the retroclones |
I'd be up for 3.5 or 4.0. For my money, 4.0 just doesn't have the same feel as the previous generations; too much changed in terms of the way magic items work. The complete revamp and dismissal of iconic D&D monsters and worlds (the 100 year jump for the Forgotten Realms, for instance) was unnecessary and felt like an FU to long time players. The "powers" available to other classes are Ok, but to a cerain extent represent the diminishment of the players' ability to role play. I came up with my own cool moves which was way more fun than continuously having to scan my powers cards or the handbook to remind myself what I'm allowed to do, or just how those powers work.
ReplyDeleteIn 4.0's defense, one of the real strengths is the cleaned up feat selection. It's much more logical. Also, the new game emphasizes party balance, so you no longer have munchkined characters or rules lawyers monopolizing what the party does. I agree that wizards are much more playable now. Overall 4.0 is fun, I'd play it, it's just not D&D.
I haven't read the Finch piece yet, but I'm guessing I can figure out his point.
Definitely read the PDF. Finch makes a great argument for playing D&D in the old style. A lot of these guys play both 4e as well as 1e (or at least one of the retroclones) - that's why they're so familiar with that certain missing "something" from 4e.
ReplyDeleteHe breaks it down to four "zen moments":
(1) Rulings, Not Rules - role playing a character dealing with a pit trap is far more interesting to the narrative than to simply roll some dice to notice and disable it.
(2) Player Skill, Not Character Abilities - instead of simply rolling a Diplomacy check to sneak past a guard, how about role playing to get past him?
(3) Heroic, Not Superhero - Power gaming became a thing of 3e and still persists into 4e due to the notion that players should be able to become a superhero, but think of some of the best fantasy books out there. The primary characters are better than their kin, but they aren't superheroes. It is far more interesting to cultivate your character to be Batman instead of Superman.
Forget "Game Balance" - your characters shouldn't always encounter traps that can be disabled if the dice are rolled properly. The game was not balanced and it shouldn't be. Wizards are terribly weak at the beginning and incredibly powerful at higher levels - that's the payoff of sticking it through. Not every character should be on equal ground - it's just not as fun and doesn't contribute as well to the story.
The point of his piece is that D&D was always a game about the narrative. The players and the DM are working together to create an interesting and fun story. Sure, some characters can and will die. No big deal. Let's roll up another one and get on with the story. Yes, that player's character can hold their own in a fight better than mine. No, there aren't rules that cover every possible chance encounter or obstacle. We used to use narrative to overcome these things. On the flip side, the rules were malleable and where there might be a rule to govern a situation, toss it out the window if it makes the narrative secondary to the action.
I love his points and would love to play at least one session of an old school game. It certainly doesn't cost anything: download OSRIC for free (has all the rules, monsters, treasure, etc in one easy to search PDF).
Insofar as online tabletop programs go, I've looked around in depth. The best paid one seems to be Fantasy Grounds (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/features/) and the best free, open source one is RPTools (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/features/), which is actually a group of tools like dice rollers and online mapping utilities. Fantasy Grounds (the paid one) can support rules sets for 3.5, 4.0 *and* OSRIC. It may be worth investing a little dough if we all think we might actually use it. However, since 1e and OSRIC are mostly "off the table" instead of the chess-like tactical movements of miniatures on a table that 4e is now, we don't really need to have an incredibly powerful utility - RPTools should suffice with its dice roller and basic map tools.