The next month or three will be very busy, as I hope to have no less than four adventure modules out during that time. Two at the very least.
But I need some input. I don't know which game I should use to release these things, or whether I should use one at all. And for these things to be successful, they need to be convenient to use for you.
(Insect Shrine will be OSRIC since that's what I advertised all that time ago.)
So tell me...
Would you be more likely to buy a module that was "branded" and statted for one of the specific clones (Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, OSRIC, etc)?
Would you be less likely to buy a module that was specifically branded for a clone you're not using?
Would you be less likely to purchase an adventure that was not specifically for any of the clones, with general statting (for example: "In this room are six zombies," with no additional stats or notes, with unique or unusual creatures being listed along the lines of, "... armor class equal to chain plus shield...") that you would need to "convert" no matter which version you're playing?
(one thing I will not do is dual/triple/whatever stat blocks for the different games as it takes too much space and looks very unattractive on the page...)
What other thoughts and concerns do you, the buying public, have along these lines that I should be aware of?
But I need some input. I don't know which game I should use to release these things, or whether I should use one at all. And for these things to be successful, they need to be convenient to use for you.
(Insect Shrine will be OSRIC since that's what I advertised all that time ago.)
So tell me...
Would you be more likely to buy a module that was "branded" and statted for one of the specific clones (Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, OSRIC, etc)?
Would you be less likely to buy a module that was specifically branded for a clone you're not using?
Would you be less likely to purchase an adventure that was not specifically for any of the clones, with general statting (for example: "In this room are six zombies," with no additional stats or notes, with unique or unusual creatures being listed along the lines of, "... armor class equal to chain plus shield...") that you would need to "convert" no matter which version you're playing?
(one thing I will not do is dual/triple/whatever stat blocks for the different games as it takes too much space and looks very unattractive on the page...)
What other thoughts and concerns do you, the buying public, have along these lines that I should be aware of?
I vote for keeping it generic and using the general statting method you describe above for maximum cross-clone/old school compatibility.
ReplyDeleteI would be most likely to buy Insect Shrine. That's what I, the paying customer, want.
ReplyDeleteAfter that, I'd be more likely to purchase something that appealed to me above/beyond brand. I'm probably the naive of the bunch, but I buy an adventure because it sounds good. I'd buy C&C, LL, OSRIC, SW, etc/etc/etc.
If I have to pick one of the above, I'd say "SW or nothing! Gollum....."
I'm slightly more likely to buy a game built for Labyrinth Lord than the others, but honestly, I never buy adventures for the adventure.
ReplyDeleteWhat I really want is inspiration and stuff I can steal for my own adventures. "Green Devil Face" is more likely to win my money than any adventure. For an adventure to win my cash, It's got to have something in it that draws me: a well-researched Bronze Age theme, or wild location, or a new take on a favorite monster. And cities. For some reason I love cities, especially with lots of neat architectural and anthropological detail.
Which probably doesn't do you much good at all, but since you asked...
I'd be less likely to buy a game that was advertised as being statted for a specific retroclone game. Keep it generic on the cover and there's not that slight - if entirely unintentional - air of "This was not intended for your game of choice."
ReplyDeleteAs for statblocks in the module. The "armed/armoured with...", "treat as..." is welcome. It saves tripping over erroneous-for-your-game mechanics during play. Besides, you know we're only gonna tinker with everything in the book anyway.
Insect Shrine (boy am I glad I caught *that* typo in time): we hungers for it. And try to price it so you profit a fit this time around. ;)
I would like a stat block, but I don't particularly care which denomination.
ReplyDeleteI'd be slightly less likely to buy a product branded for a clone I don't have, but since I'm a fan of your stuff, the 'James Raggi brand' carries more weight than that of any of the clones.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I'd prefer to see generic monster listings.
Looking over what you done in the past. My guess is that the modules use standard D&D monsters and tropes combined with unique creations of your own. I would surprised if you used any of the unique twists of any of the major retro-clones.
ReplyDeleteI would just release your module stat block under the OGL and proclaim your module compatible for all editions derived from the 1974 rules.
That was the approach I took with Points of Light and the Wild North. Maybe a year ago supporting a specific retro clone edition is important but ever since all of the four or five major clones were release I get the feeling that the community is quite happy with this situation and gleefully kitbashing a variety of products for their campaign.
For a rules supplement this would be important but for a Adventure Module just go Old School.
Generic all the way. I hate stat blocks.
ReplyDeleteThe whole point of retro-clones is to enable the publication of material that just happens to be compatible with the original systems we use. Personally, I've bought material marketed for OSRIC, Swords & Wizardry and Labyrinth Lord. That's fine. I've also bought stuff without specific retro-clone compatibility. Also fine. I'd rather it not be S&W, because the dual AC thing bugs me. Honestly, I'd prefer Labyrinth Lord or OSRIC, because they are both indistinguishable from old TSR stat blocks, or if you absolutely must just make it OD&D compatible and say "compatible with old school games." I'd also prefer as little as possible in the stat blocks (hit points, AC, damage done, movement rate). Really if you need more than Goblins (#4, HP 3, 4, 4, 6, AC 7, Dmg 1d6, Mv 90'), then it's probably a creature you need to stat up in the module.
ReplyDeleteI'd prefer "Generic" with the intent to be compatible with D&D and its clones. A stat block would look like:
ReplyDeleteBob, L Hum Wiz 3
Dagger, two attack spells of choice
15 gp
Maybe a note like "Slightly better than average AC"
I prefer generic products for settings, but for adventures I'd prefer branded. I can't stand having to search for stat blocks, or trap rules when I'm reading an adventure (much less when running it.) For me the whole point of running a module is to save time.
ReplyDeleteI'm much more likely to by a product for a specific brand then a generic supplement, even if the product isn't for my preferred brand. As far as specific brands, I'm partial to OD&D, and Basic clones, but I have run adventures from OSRIC in LL with no problems. I would prefer to know what level of work I'm expected to do before hand.
I'm more likely to buy something that is not marketed for a particular retro-clone but I'd be happy with elementary stat blocks that include HP, AC, and HD/Lvl.
ReplyDeleteI prefer generic and short stat blocks.
ReplyDeleteIf you're sure there's nothing derivative of the rules you used to write it, (eg, no "stirges") I'd NOT use the OGL and claim compatibility, with the appropriate disclaimers.
ReplyDeleteIf you're NOT sure, I would take a look at the "fanbases" of the clones and go OGL with one of them. I think the fanbases of 3 games - S&W, LL, and BFRPG - have a lot of overlap. The OSRIC group is, I think, less integrated with the others. I think OSRIC reaches a bit more into the mainstream gaming community, but I don't know how many sales that would represent.
Also, there's the issue that the really open-ended 3 games tend to interpret a module differently than the 1e/OSRIC method. So I'd pay a lot of attention to whether you wrote it with 0e or 1e in mind - it makes a difference to the way it plays.
What did you playtest it with?
I don't care either way as on the fly conversion is easy, but I would prefer simple stats rather than none at all.
ReplyDelete>>Also, there's the issue that the really open-ended 3 games tend to interpret a module differently than the 1e/OSRIC method. So I'd pay a lot of attention to whether you wrote it with 0e or 1e in mind - it makes a difference to the way it plays.
ReplyDeleteWhat did you playtest it with?
I run my weekly games now using BFRPG, but I ran a yearlong 1E campaign in 06-07. The adventures I'll be putting out uses material from both campaigns, and in some cases I've run the same adventures in both campaigns off of the same notes.
My selection of which game to use seems to be based on character creation considerations (Race and class or race as class? How are ability score modifiers handled? How many races and classes do I need in this campaign? Use the bigger hit die types or not? etc), as the actual play differences really don't amount to much (spell description trivialities, mostly).
Maybe the entire Old School should adopt a standard 3-4 pages of conversion charts that everybody prints at the back of every new product. SW/LL/OSCRIC etc.
ReplyDeleteIt'd be useful, plus create a sense of community in the product.
>>Maybe the entire Old School should adopt a standard 3-4 pages of conversion charts that everybody prints at the back of every new product. SW/LL/OSCRIC etc.
ReplyDeleteThis would also be more than 10% of the total page count of half the things I'm preparing. I already feel bad about taking up space with the OGL...
Some simple stats and generic powers are fine. Anything can be converted on the fly.
ReplyDeleteI'll buy it as long as it's recognizable as "classic D&D." If you base it on any edition before 1989, I could care less which.
ReplyDelete"This would also be more than 10% of the total page count of half the things I'm preparing. I already feel bad about taking up space with the OGL..."
ReplyDeleteBut with PDF and non-traditional printing methods, does that really matter anymore as long as the extra content is useful and not just padding the page count?
Voting!
ReplyDeleteI vote for generic. My homebrew D&D resembles the original thing just enough for modules to be usable, but basically even hit point counts won't make any sense. So "6 zombies" is enough for me, and if they should have some special properties, just tell me in plain language - I'll implement the rules-stuff.
Doesn't matter to me. It can be from any system, I freely pilfer and pillage from any and all gaming systems for my games. It can be gurps for all I care as long as the actual content is good stat blocks don't really matter to me. I end up home brewing them in the end anyways.
ReplyDelete