One of the things the OSR was supposed to do (at least in my mind) was free us from the necessity of rules fundamentalism. Making products for OSRIC for example was allow publishers to make "1st Edition" compatible products without saying "Compatible with Advanced Dungeons & Dragons".
Basic Fantasy seemed close to this as well, but more of a melding of the "Basic" and "Advanced" ideas.
At the end of the day though a product that is compatible for one game should work with another.
In a couple of recent posts from Billy Goes to Mordor (love that blog name) suggests that there is still some form of system adherence in the OSR crowd.
http://billygoes.blogspot.co.il/2013/08/by-numbers-relative-popularity-of-dnd.html
http://billygoes.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-relative-popularity-of-various.html
His numbers, based on his survey came out like this:
He compares this to relative Google+ groups sizes as an index of popularity.
But this brings up the larger question again. Are eliminating the necessity of a certain rules system (D&D Basic, Advanced, 2nd ed) just to exchange it for another (Basic Fantasy, ACKS, DCC)?
So when looking for a OSR supplement, adventure or add-on do the clone rules matter to you?
Back in the day we used pretty much everything with everything else. Still do in fact.
For example I mentioned a while back how you can use ACKS with the B/X Companion or even B/X Companion with Labyrinth Lord or Basic Fantasy. Those are easy though due to their relationship back to Basic D&D.
What are your experiences? Do you ignore S&W's single save when using the Tome of Horrors with Basic Fantasy? Do you convert on the fly?
Basic Fantasy seemed close to this as well, but more of a melding of the "Basic" and "Advanced" ideas.
At the end of the day though a product that is compatible for one game should work with another.
In a couple of recent posts from Billy Goes to Mordor (love that blog name) suggests that there is still some form of system adherence in the OSR crowd.
http://billygoes.blogspot.co.il/2013/08/by-numbers-relative-popularity-of-dnd.html
http://billygoes.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-relative-popularity-of-various.html
His numbers, based on his survey came out like this:
- DCC RPG 32%
- Labyrinth Lord 31%
- Swords and Wizardry 28%
- LotFP 24%
- ACKS 10%
- OSRIC 8%
He compares this to relative Google+ groups sizes as an index of popularity.
- Swords &Wizardry 826
- DCC RPG 776
- Lamentations of the Flame Princess 498
- Basic Fantasy 387
- Labyrinth Lord 382
- Adventurer Conquerer King 347
- Castles & Crusades 303
- OSRIC 110
But this brings up the larger question again. Are eliminating the necessity of a certain rules system (D&D Basic, Advanced, 2nd ed) just to exchange it for another (Basic Fantasy, ACKS, DCC)?
So when looking for a OSR supplement, adventure or add-on do the clone rules matter to you?
Back in the day we used pretty much everything with everything else. Still do in fact.
For example I mentioned a while back how you can use ACKS with the B/X Companion or even B/X Companion with Labyrinth Lord or Basic Fantasy. Those are easy though due to their relationship back to Basic D&D.
What are your experiences? Do you ignore S&W's single save when using the Tome of Horrors with Basic Fantasy? Do you convert on the fly?