| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 02 Mar 2009 : 07:51:06
http://necromancergames.yuku.com/topic/10440
quote:
OK guys. I am getting ready to jump into 4E (and Pathfinder too, settle down).
Here is my plan: I am going to create "Classic 4E": a set of alternate content for 4E to replicate the old school way of playing D&D. It will work in conjunction with the 4E PHB.
It will contain the classic races--elf, dwarf, half-elf, halfling, human, gnome, etc. No dragonborn, no warforged. Now, that said, if you and your DM want to use that content from the PHB you can.
It will contain the classic classes--fighter, ranger, paladin, rogue, cleric, druid, wizard, monk, as well as some 3E favorites such as the barbarian and bard.
It will have some rules changes:
--things will not be tied to the grid, they will be done in feet.
--there will be no more hopping around the grid teleporting, but movement in combat will still be stressed
--the old powers that have to do with things other than combat will make their return
--spell memorization will return in a fun new way
--powers will be more limited for the classes, but more useful. Not every class is a wizard
--alignment returns (optionally)
--buffing is not forbidden anymore. 4E took away buffing spells. I dont mind putting them back.
I want to do this the way Paizo is doing Pathfinder. I want to develop it as a community. I will soon be opening a "4E Classic" forum with a thread for each class and race etc. We can post incremental updates of our rules compiled as a pdf as alpha and beta. The final version will be available as a pdf and perhaps in print as well since people love thier printed game books.
But I want to develop this together.
So what do you think?
Clark
-Very interesting, found this topic at Paizo. 
BRIMSTONE |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Ardashir |
Posted - 09 Mar 2009 : 22:57:32
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
-Necro is going to make a Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Tome of Horrors. 
BRIMSTONE
What, seriously? This is amazingly good news if so. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 09 Mar 2009 : 22:21:07
quote:
Originally posted by Julian Grimm
Jes trin to be helpful. 
I know.
quote:
Not really. I just get tired of some of the attitudes of both sides of the debate.
Fair enough, then.
quote:
Check places like Dragonsfoot and Knights and Knaves.
I've checked out K&K, but didn't like it much for reasons I'd rather not get into here (I have no opinion on whether or not your own assessment of them is accurate or not, though--I didn't stick around long). I think I went to Dragonsfoot but don't remember having any particular issues with them. |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 09 Mar 2009 : 22:13:58
-I know its a book of monsters. I am glad that all of the guessing/second guessing is over. 
BRIMSTONE |
| Kuje |
Posted - 09 Mar 2009 : 17:26:15
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
-Necro is going to make a Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Tome of Horrors.
BRIMSTONE
They made a Tome of Horrors for 3e also. It's a book of monsters. :) |
| arry |
Posted - 09 Mar 2009 : 11:59:56
I do wonder if the market-segment that Necromancer Games hopes to appeal to is large enough to be commercial viable? Obviously they do but I'm not convinced. |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 09 Mar 2009 : 08:50:28
-Necro is going to make a Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Tome of Horrors.
BRIMSTONE |
| Julian Grimm |
Posted - 08 Mar 2009 : 19:48:32
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by Julian Grimm
The retro-clone movement (Yes it is called that) is really just a small branch of players. Some of what they do is good but not commercially viable and IMNSHO borders on copyright infringement. The movement started when a few got mad at Troll Lord Games over the fact that C&C would not be a word for word redux of 1e. (Or seemed to start PM me if you ant to discuss this further)
quote:
Thanks for the offer but I'm not *that* into this, I was just giving a few comments based on my reading some interesting blogs (I'm more of an interested passerby than anything).
Jes trin to be helpful.
quote:
As for their comments on 4e, some actually liked it but most used their favorite 4e bashing names like 4bortion, 4on and such.
quote:
I actually didn't see any of those terms, at least not on the blogs I visited. Most such blogs actually didn't dwell very much on 4E, nor were they concerned with bashing it. Again, I have no vested interest here, but you come off as though you have a bit of an axe to grind.
Not really. I just get tired of some of the attitudes of both sides of the debate.
quote:
None few if any saw the game.
How do you know?
Check places like Dragonsfoot and Knights and Knaves. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 05 Mar 2009 : 22:14:38
Everyone wanting a piece of the pie is all well and good, but when the pie is the size of a quarter, you aren't going to get much of a taste. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 23:56:33
quote:
Originally posted by Julian Grimm
The retro-clone movement (Yes it is called that) is really just a small branch of players. Some of what they do is good but not commercially viable and IMNSHO borders on copyright infringement. The movement started when a few got mad at Troll Lord Games over the fact that C&C would not be a word for word redux of 1e. (Or seemed to start PM me if you ant to discuss this further)
Thanks for the offer but I'm not *that* into this, I was just giving a few comments based on my reading some interesting blogs (I'm more of an interested passerby than anything).
quote:
As for their comments on 4e, some actually liked it but most used their favorite 4e bashing names like 4bortion, 4on and such.
I actually didn't see any of those terms, at least not on the blogs I visited. Most such blogs actually didn't dwell very much on 4E, nor were they concerned with bashing it. Again, I have no vested interest here, but you come off as though you have a bit of an axe to grind.
quote:
None few if any saw the game.
How do you know?
|
| Julian Grimm |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 23:17:08
Brings to mind something about counting chickens before they've... |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 22:54:21
-If anybody can pull this off it would be Clark and the Necromancer Crew. 
BRIMSTONE |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 22:44:16
quote:
Originally posted by ranger_of_the_unicorn_run
Couldn't this loosely be called "redefining"? Particularly with alignment, they are walking a fine line.
http://necromancergames.yuku.com/reply/178122/t/Classic-4E.html#reply-178122
quote:
Nope. Anything we do will be labeled "classic," whether explicitly stated or not. In other words, any and all terms, even if not specifically labeled as such, contained withing [final name of product] shall be considered "[name of term] [classic]," such as "paladin [classic]" or "magic missile [classic]". So I wont be redefining terms. I will be creating new ones
Come on, I'm a lawyer. Think I can't get by that Level 3 challenge?
-From Clark/Orcus
BRIMSTONE |
| Julian Grimm |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 21:30:40
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I must be missing something here. Then again, I was never a big fan of any of the 'retro' crazes.
I don't know *too* much about any retro crazes, but having read a few old-school gaming blogs like Grognardia, it seems to me that the people who are really into "retrogaming" actually do just play 1E. That's not to say they have no opinions on newer editions like 4E (comments about 4E are usually along the lines of "it might be a good game but it's not D&D"), but I'm not sure if they'd bother playing even if it did feel like D&D to them.
The retro-clone movement (Yes it is called that) is really just a small branch of players. Some of what they do is good but not commercially viable and IMNSHO borders on copyright infringement. The movement started when a few got mad at Troll Lord Games over the fact that C&C would not be a word for word redux of 1e. (Or seemed to start PM me if you ant to discuss this further)
As for their comments on 4e, some actually liked it but most used their favorite 4e bashing names like 4bortion, 4on and such. None few if any saw the game. So those comments can be dismissed.
No the market can't support so many variations of the same game. That is why the Retro-clones will fade and leave Pathfinder, C&C, 4e and maybe Necro's 4e. But I don't think it will last that long. |
| ranger_of_the_unicorn_run |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 21:02:30
From the glance I took through the SRD, it looks like they are no longer forced to stop printing OGL material.
EDIT: I suppose Ashe just answered that. I didn't think about the redefining section in those terms. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 20:59:38
They do have to choose between the two, since by definition of the GSL, producing OGL/3E SRD products 'redefines' the items in the 4E SRD, making it a breach of contract.
However, I *believe* the opposite does not hold true... Using the 3E SRD/OGL to make a 4th Edition-like product would not violate the OGL (in my non-lawyer/non-copyright opinion). |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 20:39:23
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Not if they follow the GSL.
I thought they had to choose between OGL- or GSL-related content? Has GSL been revised to allow you to do both? |
| Kuje |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 17:58:05
Reading the thread on ENworld, Clark, the head of Necromancer Games, seems happy with the changes even though there was stuff he pushed for that didn't get changed.
However, it seems he is now comfortable about signing on.
"Look, there are things that werent changed that I think should have been changed. So dont condescendingly say that since they deigned to make some changes that everyone has to be happy. That isnt the end of the analysis.
I think it was a mistake not to make some of the additional changes and some other things.
But that said, I now view the GSL as an acceptable license and I will be accepting it and using it and supporting 4E. That doesnt mean I have to like everything about it. I dont. But it is now acceptable to me for use.
Clark
__________________
Clark Peterson
Necromancer Games
www.necromancergames.com" |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 17:50:35
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Well, if people are so disatisfied with 4e already, why would they be willing to invest in even MORE money to fix it? If your willing to play with a system that needs multiple books to make it "feel like you want it to", just keep playing 3e!
I just don't get it... buy 4e... then buy books to make 4e feel like 1e... when you already have older editions on your shelf? 
Simply because a system is flawed doesn't mean it's useless... We still have plenty of 3.5 material, so -- by your logic -- there's no money to be had by Paizo making the Pathfinder game. With people flocking to the Paizo banner, this is clearly not the case. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 17:07:54
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I must be missing something here. Then again, I was never a big fan of any of the 'retro' crazes.
I don't know *too* much about any retro crazes, but having read a few old-school gaming blogs like Grognardia, it seems to me that the people who are really into "retrogaming" actually do just play 1E. That's not to say they have no opinions on newer editions like 4E (comments about 4E are usually along the lines of "it might be a good game but it's not D&D"), but I'm not sure if they'd bother playing even if it did feel like D&D to them. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 16:58:37
Well, if people are so disatisfied with 4e already, why would they be willing to invest in even MORE money to fix it? If your willing to play with a system that needs multiple books to make it "feel like you want it to", just keep playing 3e!
I just don't get it... buy 4e... then buy books to make 4e feel like 1e... when you already have older editions on your shelf?
I must be missing something here. Then again, I was never a big fan of any of the 'retro' crazes.
If you liked OD&D, 1e, 2e, or 3e the best, then PLAY OD&D, 1e, 2e, or 3e! If you think 3e was mostly perfect, but could use some much-needed tweaking, then go with 3P (or even AU). And if you absolutely hated all those editions and just wanted to get to the encounters and have well-balanced rules, then go with 4e.
I think the 'P&P RPG pie' has already been divided up into way too many slices, and further sub-dividing the fan-base is going to bring us back to a time when every campaign setting had its own ruleset. Diversity may be a good thing, but if everyone has his own system, who's he gonna play with? 
There just aren't enough of us P&P players left to keep creating these divisions, and still have the hobby be viable. |
| Julian Grimm |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 15:38:23
After just a glance at both the new GSL and the 'SRD' for 4e I have to agree. The thing looks like a legal 'Tomb of Horrors' as far as content use. One step out of line and they can nail you. Not something I'd want to try if I ran a company even half as respected as Necro. I think Clark's thinking isn't very clear here. I feel he is making a big mistake. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 15:07:01
What is REALLY sad is the 4E SRD (download links). Where the 3E version had complete statistics and all the information you need to run the game, the new version is a simple list of everything in the published books. If you want to include information from the SRD in your product, you list the item and what book it is from (you can't even tell them what PAGE), ensuring that if you sell a 4E product, your customers have to go out and buy all the original books.
I was going to say Necromancer Games could publish their idea, but after looking at the GSL and SRD, I don't think they can. |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 14:40:34
Heh, alignment is an entire argument in and of itself. |
| ranger_of_the_unicorn_run |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 14:23:43
Couldn't this loosely be called "redefining"? Particularly with alignment, they are walking a fine line. |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 05:43:43
-Here is the revised GSL
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1156879
BRIMSTONE |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 05:28:26
-Reading the Necro Forums, Clark/Orcus wants total compatablility with 4E. Pretty much a bunch of House rules that one could use or could not use.
BRIMSTONE |
| Julian Grimm |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 01:57:35
I honestly don't think they will. |
| ranger_of_the_unicorn_run |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 01:48:53
Is WotC actually allowing this kind of drastic change to the 4e rules? |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 03 Mar 2009 : 00:42:05
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Also... 'Classic 4e'?
I was unawre that it was already part of the 'Golden Age', and people wanted it 'brought back'.
I think it's more about trying to attract people who feel 4E "just isn't D&D." Of course, what actually is D&D means different things to different people, but that's what I took from that comment.
In any case, I am interested in seeing how they do this... |
| Julian Grimm |
Posted - 02 Mar 2009 : 21:07:41
I wish they'd just sign on with Pathfinder or make their own OGL system and be done with it. I don't think anything 4e related will do well for them at all. |
