g026r wrote:with a properly produced PDF it's the simplest type of reference available: one with which you can do a near-instantaneous full-text search.
bbarsh wrote:Crap that thing is 400 pages long...
Shingen wrote:Just to reiterate and clarify: Legal protection, price, and organization. LegalityWhile game systems are not copyrightable, their presentation is; weird, but legally true. Also, names like Dungeons and Dragons are trademarked and protected as well. So while I may be able to produce stuff for AD&D 1e, marketing it with any of the names, like D&D (owned by WotC) or using the rules details as described in their books (mind flayers, beholders, name levels, descriptions of stats, etc.) can be an infringement. As such, you get the Retro-clones. These are first and foremost a legal shield, as stated above. By using the OGL to render d20 as a previous edition of the game, you have a legal version of the rules everyone can use. I can write for OSRIC as much as I want, and since it is 1e, my stuff is 1e compatible. It basically allows gaming companies to produce supplements and rules for out of print but protected games. They charge for supplements, because they are still game companies or authors; the core system is free. PriceAnd while I can get the BECMI set or 1e Core books on eBay for reasonable prices ( I nabbed an extra 1e PHb from an early printing for 8 bucks the other day), OSRIC, Labyrinth Lord, et al are totally free. Free is good, but the real benefit of free is that people are willing to give it a try, because there is no risk in doing so. This has led to the Old School Renaissance, because new players and old have gotten the rules for free, remember how much they loved them, and began playing with them again. It is easy to induce people "looking for a system" to try the retro clones, because they are free. OrganizationThe writing of RPG books has advanced immeasurably in the past 20 years. Additionally, the understanding of how people learn games has grown. As such, these retro-clones are more clear, easier to learn, and better organized than their fathers. Many people who learned D&D in the 70s and early 80s can attest that the only way to really learn was to play with others, because the books were often poor teachers for the uninitiated. Retro-clones keep this in mind. Also, with 30 years of hindsight, things can be put in better context and be clearer. For example, while OSRIC is a mammoth 400 pages, it includes material from all the core books, and does so in a more organized manner. So those are some reasons. I am not saying they are great reasons, but they are reasons why Retro-clones are popular.
JasonZavoda wrote:What I'm wondering is why? Is it about creating a new game system? Or a game system based on D&D/AD&D or about publishing AD&D material (like Fullerton has done) and not getting chased down by the WoTC enforcers?
JasonZavoda wrote:Popular? My question was why they exist at all. What data do you have on their popularity?
JasonZavoda wrote:You still are unlikely to make much money doing it.
robertsconley wrote:Sales by the individual authors. The interest of distributors in carrying one or more of the Retro Clones. My own experience with Points of Light is probably a poor example as it marketed to all edition of D&D including the most recent. But it had sales in the high hundreds and it is a GM only product. Fight On! has a couple of hundred sales as well that was given to me by the publisher. While not spectacular in relation to what Wizards or Paizo does the important thing is that it is growing.
JasonZavoda wrote:Numbers please. What are the sales figures?
Does the interest from distributors mean pre-orders?
Is a couple of hundred equal to 200 hundred, 300, etc...
JasonZavoda wrote:The general impression I have is that AD&D and Original D&D are selling extremely well on ebay. Badmike feels that the rulebook prices have sky rocketed ( though I think the sales are good, the prices seem pretty low to me). I would say from ebay sales alone that original D&D and AD&D are popular systems. How do the retro clones compare?
SimperingToad wrote:The question is: popular with whom? Collectors? Gamers who are replacing worn out copies? New players of old systems? That's really a rhetorical question, as we can't determine such a breakdown from EBay sales.
SimperingToad wrote:It would be interesting to see the number of Retro games vs. the old rulebooks sold to completely new gamers, but again, that's asking the nigh impossible.
Kingofpain89 wrote:Mark Knopfler would be rolling in his grave if he were dead.
