official Classic modules by Wotc& Goodman games

[Asterionaisien]

Hello community, any chance those will be converted for Fantasy Grounds? I would be very interested about playing them :)

https://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?3977-WotC-Goodman-Games-Partner-To-Reprint-Classic-Modules-for-5E

[kp9911]

If they are sold officially on from Wotc, they more than likely would be seen here as well.

[TMO]

The Keep on the Borderlands was the first adventure I ever went through. That would be such a nostalgic trip to see this ported to 5E! :)

[Asterionaisien]

Yeah, that adventure was the gate to another world for a generation..maybe now it will continue to inspire a new generation again!

[Teufelhunde87]

If they are sold officially on from Wotc, they more than likely would be seen here as well.

I am converting Keep on the Borderlands. May be worth putting that on hold until I see what goes on with this!

[ddavison]

Since this is an agreement between Goodman Games and WOTC, we won't automatically be able to do it. We would need to get approval from both parties to do a conversion and we had not been able to secure a license with Goodman Games in the past. This might be an opportunity to revisit that with Wizards of the Coast essentially vouching for us.

[dudeslife]

we had not been able to secure a license with Goodman Games in the past.

This is why I don't purchase Goodman Games material.

[celestian]

Since this is an agreement between Goodman Games and WOTC, we won't automatically be able to do it. We would need to get approval from both parties to do a conversion and we had not been able to secure a license with Goodman Games in the past. This might be an opportunity to revisit that with Wizards of the Coast essentially vouching for us.

Poke WoTC about supporting ALL versions of D&D, not just 5e next time you guys talk ;) I mean it's free money for WoTC (dmsguild at least).

[Asterionaisien]

Poke WoTC about supporting ALL versions of D&D, not just 5e next time you guys talk ;) I mean it's free money for WoTC (dmsguild at least).

I'd like it very much too, my most cherished edition is AD&D 2, but make no sense for a company to do it. Essentially is akin to raise competition for the new products internally.

@DDAVISON I'll cross the fingers for you then. Goodman games has really lot of cool stuff for sale. But the old modules would be really a HIT imo.

[celestian]

I'd like it very much too, my most cherished edition is AD&D 2, but make no sense for a company to do it. Essentially is akin to raise competition for the new products internally.

That's not true. I will not buy 5e products so it's no competition at all. Infact the only way I'd give WoTC more money is if they did give me the option. The only thing I've purchased from WoTC in recent history is the AD&D 1e and 2e reprints and old school TSR era re-prints and PDFs.

They are currently already selling PDFs and printed product. Why not? It costs them very little to have reprinted or sell PDFs of older product. It would be the same for FG modules. I'd love to work up ToEE or GDQ.

[MadBadHare]

I am converting Keep on the Borderlands. May be worth putting that on hold until I see what goes on with this!

And I did a conversion of B2 - In Search of the Unknown already ;)

[Trenloe]

And I did a conversion of B2 - In Search of the Unknown already ;)
Never heard of that one. ;)

[leozelig]

This is why I don't purchase Goodman Games material.

I keep telling myself I am going to do that, but I haven't been making my Wisdom/Willpower saving throws :p

[Teufelhunde87]

I keep telling myself I am going to do that, but I haven't been making my Wisdom/Willpower saving throws :p

I keep rolling natural ones on mine. Gaming budget is out of control! Lol

[Varsuuk]

That's not true. I will not buy 5e products so it's no competition at all. Infact the only way I'd give WoTC more money is if they did give me the option. The only thing I've purchased from WoTC in recent history is the AD&D 1e and 2e reprints and old school TSR era re-prints and PDFs.

They are currently already selling PDFs and printed product. Why not? It costs them very little to have reprinted or sell PDFs of older product. It would be the same for FG modules. I'd love to work up ToEE or GDQ.

Only reason I tried 5e is due to FG. It isn't bad, but I prefer 1e & early 2e. The only products I have bought from WotC besides 5E PHB out of curiousity is stuff from Rpgnow for 1e and 2e. If it were an officialcpurchaseable 5e quality ruleset, I'd pay up to $39 for just the ruleset and would buy core books plus modules as they came out.

WotC gets my cash cos I keep my 5e set due to loving messing with FG. If I ever get in a steady C&C campaign or possibly SW, I won't be buying any more 5e, i LOVE the ruleset's automation, but don't. are about the game itself compared to the others I mentioned.

Eventually 5e will lose me.

[leozelig]

Only reason I tried 5e is due to FG. It isn't bad, but I prefer 1e & early 2e. The only products I have bought from WotC besides 5E PHB out of curiousity is stuff from Rpgnow for 1e and 2e. If it were an officialcpurchaseable 5e quality ruleset, I'd pay up to $39 for just the ruleset and would buy core books plus modules as they came out.

WotC gets my cash cos I keep my 5e set due to loving messing with FG. If I ever get in a steady C&C campaign or possibly SW, I won't be buying any more 5e, i LOVE the ruleset's automation, but don't. are about the game itself compared to the others I mentioned.

Eventually 5e will lose me.

I would personally love to start a B/X D&D game on FG. I ran a bunch of the AD&D classic modules a few years ago. Between this and Tales from the Yawning Portal, there seems to be a market for the older stuff. Unfortunately for FG, Goodman Games is involved!

[Asterionaisien]

Just a suggestion: considering wotc ir reprinting old modules side by side with new stats, would not be in their interest to let SW do a official ruleset release for older editions too? An official AD&d (1 and 2) ruleset should be profitable enough to recoup the costs involved to realize it and make money, especially if this line of modules become popular..

"Play modern or old school, your choice"

:p

[vodokar]

An official AD&d (1 and 2) ruleset should be profitable enough to recoup the costs involved to realize it and make money, especially if this line of modules become popular..




Just to provide some perspective here.

The latest version of my AD&D 1e ruleset has been downloaded 36 times and I have received a grand total of approximately $50 in voluntary PayPal or RPGNow donations since it's launch in early January. From the first moment of working on the ruleset until now, I have easily put in over 500 hours of time into the ruleset. $50/500 hours = 1 cent per hour. I certainly didn't do it for the money. :D

I have received a great many positive comments about the ruleset from those who have tried it. For me, I am very happy that 36 people found use in the ruleset. I am devoted to those people and trying to help support their enjoyment of the grand old game. I am, however, a volunteer that worked on the product in my spare time simply for the love of the game and never had any expectation of getting paid for my work or supporting my family or other people's families on revenues gained from the project.

This, however, is not a big enough foundation to support an official ruleset being built by SmiteWorks. They have overhead and professional software engineering professionals on payroll who need to make more than 1 cent per hour to survive.

At best, my ruleset might be offered to become an official ruleset; assuming myself and my users even want that to happen. I personally don't see any benefit of doing so. If I were to decide to move on or if I had a heart attack or something; then likely it would be my wishes to have SmiteWorks step in and not let my work die, but at this point, what benefit would there be to my users that I'm not now providing? Making it official doesn't mean SmiteWorks would continue development on it, adding new features etc; it just means MoonWizard would make sure it didn't die when he updates the main FG program. Any new features would still have to come from me. So, I don't see any benefit at all to my users; especially in making them purchase what I'm currently giving them for free.

The only benefit would be if SmiteWorks decided to get behind publishing of modules usable in the AD&D 1e ruleset. If they did that, then I might consider making the ruleset official. At the moment, they have not made any decisions to publish any modules useable in the AD&D ruleset.

The bottom line here is:

If you are out there and have interest in AD&D 1e or products for AD&D 1e and you haven't downloaded my ruleset; then you need to show your support and do so. If your using the fact that you need to purchase the Castles and Crusades Ruleset for $10 in order to use my ruleset as an excuse for not doing so, then you are not helping yourself or the cause; you are just proving to SmiteWorks that there are not enough serious, paying customers to make projects like this viable. You need to step up and be counted. Make your voices loud and clear.

[ddavison]

Vodokar paints a very sober, but very true assessment.

[celestian]

Just to provide some perspective here.

This, however, is not a big enough foundation to support an official ruleset being built by SmiteWorks. They have overhead and professional software engineering professionals on payroll who need to make more than 1 cent per hour to survive.


A single person writing a custom ruleset is not official support. Official support means a modern ruleset backed by multiple coders and a company. It also means (more than likely) the ability of said company to produce modules that include monsters/spells and perhaps even books. They have far more resources and experience than a single person hacking a ruleset out.

I would be surprised if there were not a huge influx of users if Smiteworks somehow managed to get approval to write and support a AD&D ruleset. Why? There is not a single ruleset/framework written by a commercial entity to support it.

I've already spent more than "500" hours working on the ruleset I'm hacking and I'd drop it if Smiteworks had an official AD&D one if for the simple fact I'd be able to just make modules/play games!




If you are out there and have interest in AD&D 1e or products for AD&D 1e and you haven't downloaded my ruleset; then you need to show your support and do so. If your using the fact that you need to purchase the Castles and Crusades Ruleset for $10 in order to use my ruleset as an excuse for not doing so, then you are not helping yourself or the cause; you are just proving to SmiteWorks that there are not enough serious, paying customers to make projects like this viable. You need to step up and be counted. Make your voices loud and clear.


I really don't like where you are going here. I do not buy C&C products because I don't like them. I purchased the first edition C&C PHB and have no more interest. It's not AD&D and so I'm not spending money on it. I've gladly spent money on AD&D (and basic D&D) products that WoTC has reprinted or made available via PDF.

I've already purchase the ultimate license from Smiteworks. They know I'm serious.

In the long run the best way to get WoTC to allow them to do it is 1) Contact WoTC and let them know. 2) Continue to buy what little AD&D products you can from WoTC. 3) Tell Smiteworks the same thing.



Just a suggestion: considering wotc ir reprinting old modules side by side with new stats, would not be in their interest to let SW do a official ruleset release for older editions too? An official AD&d (1 and 2) ruleset should be profitable enough to recoup the costs involved to realize it and make money, especially if this line of modules become popular..

"Play modern or old school, your choice"

:p

I completely agree with you Asterionaisien. Email WOTC the same thing (and nag Smiteworks whenever you can!) ;)

I would also recommend going to the DMsguild.com website (https://support.dmsguild.com/hc/en-us/requests/new) and let them know you'd like them to allow AD&D products on their site. Right now it's just 5e. At the very least we could put up modules with creatures/spells and such there if they did.

[vodokar]

Celestian, I wasn't actually referring to you. In place of purchasing the ruleset, you went to the effort of making your own. I would say that certainly qualifies as someone who is very serious about having a classic ruleset. Your voice has been counted and heard.

While I don't understand your basic stance, in that, even if someone will not use C&C directly, that person is getting the code engine to run the AD&D ruleset, as well as, the Basic Fantasy Ruleset when I am able to release that, for a price of $10. The point I was trying to make is that if someone isn't willing to spend even $10 to get a ruleset, that proves to SmiteWorks there aren't customers willing to pay for such rulesets. That is the perception they are giving, anyways. If the truth is different, then they need to speak up. However, speaking up is still not as good in getting a company to listen to you as is putting down money where your mouth is. The customer is sort of slitting their own throat. They say they want something, but aren't willing to pay for it. Again, that's just a perception being projected, but it's a strong one.

[vodokar]

Again, my point is that SmiteWorks is paying close attention to the numbers. The main reason they are paying attention is because of actions I and some others have taken in the Classic and OSR scene in recent months and discussions I and others have had with them. In years past, they would never have given this subject any notice. The fact they are now, I am very appreciative of.

Make no mistake though, it matters not how much I or others try to wave the flag and cheerlead for classic and OSR gaming. The only thing that matters to SmiteWorks is "are there enough customers willing to pay for a classic ruleset and/or classic adventure modules to meet x$ amount that we would need to make in order to keep the lights on and pay our employees". That's totally understandable and the right way for them to think; the history of RPG's is filled with companies that stuck their heads out to produce products that couldn't sell well enough to pay the bills; Designers and Dragons has an excellent account of that.

So, they are looking at the numbers. What is it they see:

36 people have downloaded the AD&D ruleset, being willing to pay $10 to SmiteWorks in order to make it work.
4 of those people felt to take the extra step of tipping the designer of the AD&D ruleset via PayPal or DriveThru RPG on a voluntary basis.
1 person designed their own ruleset.

Several others have stated in words that they would like it if an official ruleset were available and/or adventure modules for either TSR adventures or OSR style adventures from OSRIC etc., but, many of those people that said that may not be amongst those same people who are either using the currently provided AD&D ruleset or having went to the trouble to design their own.

At any rate, let's assume that everyone that has stated positively that they would support content like this actually do; the numbers still are not there to make it worth SmiteWorks to take any action on this. That is just being real.

Doug already stated as much earlier in the thread. While that doesn't represent a final judgement on the subject; it gives you a pretty good idea.

[vodokar]

A single person writing a custom ruleset is not official support. Official support means a modern ruleset backed by multiple coders and a company. It also means (more than likely) the ability of said company to produce modules that include monsters/spells and perhaps even books. They have far more resources and experience than a single person hacking a ruleset out.



My ruleset is as modern as being 3 months old. It has more features than most community rulesets and even many of the "official" rulesets. If you mean that it wasn't written using the 5e ruleset, then you are right. Neither was the Pathfinder ruleset or any other of the "official" rulesets.

Want the PHB, DMG and MM. As soon as WotC gives the permission; my ruleset will have them. That may be when a certain hot place freezes over though, so don't hold your breath.

As for being backed by several coders, that isn't the way SmiteWorks does business. They have one coder assigned to each ruleset; and in many cases, that person is a member of the community that isn't necessarily being paid to do so. For a couple of examples, Ikael is the designated developer assigned to Savage Worlds, Damned is Barbarians of Lemuria. I'm fairly certain that neither one of them is on the official payroll. Of course, Moon Wizard is always there to back them up and give advice; but then, he occasionally does that for non-official rulesets as well, cause he's a great man.

Not to be directly confrontational, as that isn't my aim, but you have no idea of my capabilities, experience or devotion to making my users happy. You have no idea what my ruleset can or can't do, because you have never used it.

None of that means that I would not step aside if SmiteWorks wanted to write an official ruleset from scratch; but we all know that would never happen. That is just not realistic. That is the very reason that I locked myself in a cage for three months sweating and slaving on the ruleset; because I knew it would not happen if someone didn't step up and do it.

[Varsuuk]

Here's a thing.

Dave, if getting official WotC licensing (pardon, not in the know regarding parlance) is a >possibility< (I feel it probably isn't, due to their track record - but see my prior parenthetical comment) then how about this:

Put up a Kickstarter with whatever minimum + buffer funding level you would need to allocate the resources and time for a 5e-level of automation/support 1e or 2e (or both eventually?) ruleset.

I said before I'd pay as high as $49 for the ruleset (obviously, aside from expected projections to recoup development - price point for most profit vis a vis price or quantity is for experts) as well as buying many many many adventure modules and the core books.

Heck, if you do not want to go the Kickstarter route, figure out what you think you need, post it and setup a pledge count. I doubt that is as good as kickstarter for even gauging interest but it can be an informal testing. If it LOOKS like you can reach the numbers, then go all out with KS.

I know I'd pledge pretty darn high if there were bundles for it ;)


But... it may well be a very limited pool. Maybe we are all 50+ or at least 40+. Good news is that group probably has time to have earned the disposable income trait.


But seriously, if there is ANY chance of getting legal rights to a full ruleset with phb/mm/dmg/ua or the equiv in 2e, then in your copious free time, run some numbers and guess what it would cost to develop it and see if we can spread word to gauge interest. Hell, I'd plop down a refundable (if you don't go ahead) deposit on you just investigating this!

I hope to try the AD&D ruleset this FG (I just realized I am going to see "Circus 1903" play on Broadway that night. Wife bought tix for all three of us. I am HOPING it isn't a matinee. I think it's 7PM EST... which probably as I write this means I may not be able to complete the game... gahhhh ... yes, tangent/"SQUIRREL!" king am I...)


Damn it, I KNEW April 8th reminded me of something... gah.

[JohnD]

Well, I am over $1600 deep into FG at this point. If there were an official AD&D ruleset and accompanying modules and whatnot, I would buy all of them. SW has to but look at my purchase history to know that I put my money where my mouth is as the saying goes.

[Nickademus]

Put up a Kickstarter with whatever minimum + buffer funding level you would need to allocate the resources and time for a 5e-level of automation/support 1e or 2e (or both eventually?) ruleset.

From looking at track record of Smiteworks, I'm fairly certain I know what is required to allocate the resources and time for a 5e-level of automation and support: a license to sell a full product line. I'm not talking about a ruleset (even a $50 ruleset) or a trio of books (PHB, DMG, MM). I mean a full product line of core books, multiple adventures, and accessories.

This is what got the 5e ruleset to where it is. And as soon as SW got the Paizo license for the full PF product line, the 3.5e/PF ruleset starting to be brought up towards the 5e-level of automation and support. I'm guessing that an AD&D license would require the core books, all the 2nd-Ed generic setting modules, and a number of Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms (maybe Dark Sun) products as a minimum to justify an official ruleset being made.

[leozelig]

From looking at track record of Smiteworks, I'm fairly certain I know what is required to allocate the resources and time for a 5e-level of automation and support: a license to sell a full product line. I'm not talking about a ruleset (even a $50 ruleset) or a trio of books (PHB, DMG, MM). I mean a full product line of core books, multiple adventures, and accessories.

This is what got the 5e ruleset to where it is. And as soon as SW got the Paizo license for the full PF product line, the 3.5e/PF ruleset starting to be brought up towards the 5e-level of automation and support. I'm guessing that an AD&D license would require the core books, all the 2nd-Ed generic setting modules, and a number of Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms (maybe Dark Sun) products as a minimum to justify an official ruleset being made.

Yeah, it seems like a lot to ask from a small company.

How did this thread about GG re-publishing B1 and B2 become (another) rant about whether we should have an official AD&D ruleset :)

[TMO]

Yeah, it seems like a lot to ask from a small company.

How did this thread about GG re-publishing B1 and B2 become (another) rant about whether we should have an official AD&D ruleset :)

I'll be honest, I followed this thread entirely but got lost in the discussion when AD&D was being discussed. I just want to make sure I understand what is meant here. When the term "AD&D" is being used, is this a reference to the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons ruleset prior to 2e, 3e, etc., being introduced?

[celestian]

I said before I'd pay as high as $49 for the ruleset (obviously, aside from expected projections to recoup development - price point for most profit vis a vis price or quantity is for experts) as well as buying many many many adventure modules and the core books.


You'll have a free one in the future built using the 5e ruleset as a baseline. Not licensed obviously but fan based. If you happen to have core rules CD you'll be able to import your books and have the phb/dmg/etc.You can also import spells from those as Spells into the ruleset. I wrote a importer for npcs as well that I've got something like 3k npcs but that is the reason I've been nagging DMsguild to allow stuff other than just 5e so I could give that (and the other jazz) away as a module for DMs. I will post a full thread in the future with all the details when I'm comfortable with the state of the ruleset.

This is the kinda ruleset I'd like to use for a module like these, B1/B2.

[LordEntrails]

I'll be honest, I followed this thread entirely but got lost in the discussion when AD&D was being discussed. I just want to make sure I understand what is meant here. When the term "AD&D" is being used, is this a reference to the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons ruleset prior to 2e, 3e, etc., being introduced?
Yes, but of course it depends :)

AD&D usually means first edition advanced. Sometimes people mean 2E as well (since it has the "Advanced" title as well). 3E and later is not included.

[vodokar]

Right, in the case of my ruleset, it currently means 1e. Celestian's ruleset primarily supports 2e, based on his discriptions. He says it also supports 1e, but as I haven't seen it and haven't seen if or how he has programmed two different combat engines in parallel to make that work, as well as, some other things that are different and would need to have parallel systems and differences on the character sheet etc.

As for Leo's question. Well, you know how it is, give someone an inch and they ask for a mile, as they say. WotC decided to republish some old adventures and people assume that has some great meaning and it's going to be raining ambrosia soon and a rainbow with a pot of gold at the end. People should know by now that WotC is just trying to milk some of their old properties for some extra cash to try to get Hasbro off their backs and it doesn't necessarily have any great significance. Read up on the history of WotC after Hasbro came into the picture and you'll understand that they are a very harsh master.

[Nylanfs]

BTW I found this handy flowchart to explain the history editions. (https://www.flickr.com/photos/11013303@N04/8330272603)

[Nickademus]

I'm curious their sources for the 'influence' connections.

[Varsuuk]

From looking at track record of Smiteworks, I'm fairly certain I know what is required to allocate the resources and time for a 5e-level of automation and support: a license to sell a full product line. I'm not talking about a ruleset (even a $50 ruleset) or a trio of books (PHB, DMG, MM). I mean a full product line of core books, multiple adventures, and accessories.

This is what got the 5e ruleset to where it is. And as soon as SW got the Paizo license for the full PF product line, the 3.5e/PF ruleset starting to be brought up towards the 5e-level of automation and support. I'm guessing that an AD&D license would require the core books, all the 2nd-Ed generic setting modules, and a number of Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms (maybe Dark Sun) products as a minimum to justify an official ruleset being made.

Well, that's my point about the license. If I will use FG for my games, I'll want real automation and ease of play. So if I have to do too much (subjective) manually, I won't be playing 1/2e online. So far my minimal use of C&C is disappointing as a ruleset. But that is because I had only ever used 5e and SW and both are well maintained. I plan on converting a few modules to modules ;p to help psych my son into playing now since he is 10 and of the video game/utube generation.

After that, since most times I'll be here with the,, I won't convert modules ail just play C&C at first and eventually migrate back to 1 or 2e or near so like Adventures Deep & Dark. I'll probably only play 5e online for "video game" play and occasional SW when can get it.

If WotC had been willing to monetize their old games and license 1e and/or 2e for FG, I'd be rebuying modules galore. But if it isn't just a desire to keep all focus on new products, it may be that the estates of those involved with 1e certainly and possibly 2e are those they do not wish to share revenue with (meaning dilution of profits) but that's just something I'm pulling out of my butte due to what the prime mover for a 2e was to begin with.

But ya, your lips to Smite's ears - if they could come up with the license, I'd even join a kickstart and prepay for 10-20 modules/books, so there :p

[damned]

Even if SmiteWorks got a 1E/2E license its highly unlikely that it would get the same functionality and lose that the 5e ruleset has. Why? Because it will never amount to more than a few single digit % of the volume of 5E sales. The Castles&Crusades ruleset has a lot of features and functionality.

[celestian]

Even if SmiteWorks got a 1E/2E license its highly unlikely that it would get the same functionality and lose that the 5e ruleset has.

I dunno, I think the ruleset wouldn't be to hard to keep similar... I'm fairly new to this system and I've got a decently working ruleset. I've been able to take most of the awesome functionality of the 5e ruleset and use it pretty much wholesale w/tweaks of course. It's the modules that I think will be the hard part... tho even there...there are some options. At least for core books. I'd just be happy if they would allow modules for non-5e on dmsguild at this point.

[damned]

I dunno, I think the ruleset wouldn't be to hard to keep similar... I'm fairly new to this system and I've got a decently working ruleset. I've been able to take most of the awesome functionality of the 5e ruleset and use it pretty much wholesale w/tweaks of course. It's the modules that I think will be the hard part... tho even there...there are some options. At least for core books. I'd just be happy if they would allow modules for non-5e on dmsguild at this point.

So whilst you are new you have the skills and patience that 99% of us dont to have gotten your ruleset to where it is. As per your other thread the 5e experience is also very much tied into the content with its auto populating various things based on the language of the entry etc. The source material for 1E/2E is nowhere near as consistent and where it is consistent it is in a differing format.

It absolutely could be done. But the market reality hasnt changed. At this point it seems it is not viable - even if there were a license - for SmiteWorks to create and maintain another D&D ruleset with the resources they have today. That doesnt mean they wouldnt work with a community dev to bring another product to market.

While 1e/2e has a significantly bigger market share than 98% of other RPGs out there - there are thousands of RPGs out there so that is not necessarily a big number. And its not necessarily a number that would translate to sales.

[Asterionaisien]

Some random thoughts I would like to add to the discussion:
-The osr market is really fragmented, there are a lot of systems with a small fanbase but no one has a critical mass; this could be because they are , after all, clones. Improved, handy, nice..but not the original. If there was a OFFICIAL release probably they would wither fast.
-SW Has licenses and good rulesets for 3.5-4-5 ed but not for AD&D.
- Other VTT's has a small AD&D fanbase, and their automated sheets are pretty good. Try creating new games and select sheets.
-Even if SW (or a community dev) did a ruleset, probably without a dual WOTC/SW announcement/mark of approval/Kickstarter i doubt the project would get enough interest and momentum, but if these conditions are meet things could change, at least out of nostalgia from the old and curiosity from new generation..of course, it would still be a niche, nostalgia market.
-AD&D,3.5 and 4 are "dead" systems. Once you did them, there are no new rules, and only manteinance time and costs are needed.
-About prices..how much someone would spend for a 40yr old ruleset? I doubt more than 29.99$..and this only if at least all the "trinity" is included and just because is D&D. For a comparison Let's not forget here D20 modern srd, 3.5 srd costs about 10$ each and are really stuffed..
-Wotc ever felt (to me) like they are ashamed by their oldest products..I found that strange..is like saying Ford would be shamed by their model T.
I still think howewer (as a fan, I do not have any hard numbers, planned roi, etc so i bow to insider knowledge) that there is a market to be tapped here.. maybe not a gold mine, but still a metal mine. Of course this would require to generate enough hype.

[ddavison]

Doing a Kickstarter project would probably be the best way to go since the customer base and appetite is the biggest question. The official 5E stuff is more than every other product in the store combined and by a fair margin.

You can look at Savage Worlds as an example of ruleset building priority. John and I really like Savage Worlds as a game engine, but even that ruleset wouldn't be where it is today without the strong community developer support that it receives. I very much liked AD&D 2E, or whatever the official version is that had all the great settings like Dark Sun, Spelljammer, etc., but I haven't played those versions in more than a decade. It would need someone with the knowledge and the skill to build out a good ruleset and the skill and knowledge to build out additional tools to help produce content for it quickly and easily. John has taken the lead on the ruleset development and core engine updates for the last 7-8 years and I've moved into the content side of things. Those are only parts of what we both do and we pretty much work 7 days a week on various things for Fantasy Grounds. More than likely, we would need to have a KS or something set up so that we knew that we had sufficient funds to bring someone on board or at least get them to commit a certain amount of time and effort to do very large chunks of the work required. Even then, adding the successful running of a Kickstarter campaign would add to our existing workload.

Finally, we would also have to get Wizards of the Coast on board with the whole thing. We actually have good working rulesets already done for 3.5E and 4E and we actually have some of that content ready to go and yet we haven't been able to get permission to release that either. It is very hard for me to imagine AD&D or earlier editions getting greenlit to go when we don't even have the newer versions out.

[Asterionaisien]

Doing a Kickstarter project would probably be the best way to go since the customer base and appetite is the biggest question. The official 5E stuff is more than every other product in the store combined and by a fair margin.

You can look at Savage Worlds as an example of ruleset building priority. John and I really like Savage Worlds as a game engine, but even that ruleset wouldn't be where it is today without the strong community developer support that it receives. I very much liked AD&D 2E, or whatever the official version is that had all the great settings like Dark Sun, Spelljammer, etc., but I haven't played those versions in more than a decade. It would need someone with the knowledge and the skill to build out a good ruleset and the skill and knowledge to build out additional tools to help produce content for it quickly and easily. John has taken the lead on the ruleset development and core engine updates for the last 7-8 years and I've moved into the content side of things. Those are only parts of what we both do and we pretty much work 7 days a week on various things for Fantasy Grounds. More than likely, we would need to have a KS or something set up so that we knew that we had sufficient funds to bring someone on board or at least get them to commit a certain amount of time and effort to do very large chunks of the work required. Even then, adding the successful running of a Kickstarter campaign would add to our existing workload.

Finally, we would also have to get Wizards of the Coast on board with the whole thing. We actually have good working rulesets already done for 3.5E and 4E and we actually have some of that content ready to go and yet we haven't been able to get permission to release that either. It is very hard for me to imagine AD&D or earlier editions getting greenlit to go when we don't even have the newer versions out.

Thanks for your answer, it clears many of my questions. On a unrelated note, i like 4th edition, too bad we cannot buy manuals for it.

[vodokar]

Well, that's my point about the license. If I will use FG for my games, I'll want real automation and ease of play. So if I have to do too much (subjective) manually, I won't be playing 1/2e online.


Please explain to me what "real automation and ease of play" that you need in order for it to be acceptable to play AD&D on FG. While I took C&C as a base to work from, I made a great many improvements in automation that was not present in the base ruleset. At the time, people were even telling me that I didn't really need to do that, but I went ahead and did it anyway.

It doesn't have the automation for effects, and doesn't have drag and drop from rulebooks to auto fill out the character sheet like 5e does. That is true. None of the other rulesets have that either. Only 5e. That is an exceptionally high bar that 5e set and is not fair to hold any other ruleset to that standard.

[Varsuuk]

I have always assumed that even if SW believed there was a market for it, that we would never get the license. But since someone else started this thread - I jumped in.

I'd pile on a Kickstarter day one and if properly word of forumed, it has the CHANCE to surprise the poopies out of us simply because there are a lot of fringe folks and nostalgic folks and... if a well respected company people believed would actually complete the KS was making one, I think there is a chance for it.

Chance for IP? Probably none.
I'm not that interested in a 5e quality ruleset alone only because it would be for coolness factor and smileswtc. To make it worth it to me, I'd have to have old modules too. And while I may make one or two if needed to - I'd never translate GDQ, T1-4, etc. I can't get it from other players due to copyright so we can't do distributive work. My only viability is if I could buy tons of module modules for it. Pipe dream.

[Varsuuk]

Please explain to me what "real automation and ease of play" that you need in order for it to be acceptable to play AD&D on FG. While I took C&C as a base to work from, I made a great many improvements in automation that was not present in the base ruleset. At the time, people were even telling me that I didn't really need to do that, but I went ahead and did it anyway.

It doesn't have the automation for effects, and doesn't have drag and drop from rulebooks to auto fill out the character sheet like 5e does. That is true. None of the other rulesets have that either. Only 5e. That is an exceptionally high bar that 5e set and is not fair to hold any other ruleset to that standard.

it IS fair if that is what I want.
I don't say that they are no good. I just say that I find playing 5e in nearly every way from creation of characters to being able to assign dmg types and have spells automagically account for resistances and automatically roll saves on spells and adjust damage and many other features, some of which appear on other rulesets I am sure but not most.

You see, I came into FG AFTER 5e, and I saw what it offered which only got better. I've only seen in Savage Worlds that sort of feature "quality/richness" but I have only played with 3.5 a little and C&C a little and created C&C modules.

The word "fair" is meaningless. This isn't a competition it is a statement of my preference and MY bar for using something. I don't care how much more support 5e has (other than applauding the support it has), I don't care that other rulesets don't come close now (I have no comprehensive proof of that, was going by your "fairness" statement) - I only care about end results for my gameplay. I care about how I cannnot convince a cranky friend to play online because it is not "complete" from his point of view enough for the bother.

Playing online is already less fun/immersive (to me, but pluses of being able to play more matter to me even if not to my friend) than being face to face ("fairness" also does not come into play here - it is the nature of one's preferences, mine specifically) so to be useful to me, the system has to be easy/fast to use with minimal amount of tinkering and hand-adjusting.

I find that in a 5e game, the only hand adjusting I do is to roll 2x my dmg with my 2h axe then drag the best to the npc because I have a trait for that. I don't worry about my armor mastery, that seems to work without me even remembering past triggering it each time I start. When I get more experience with C&C I may find things to point to, but just looking at what I can enter when creating new items/magic/npcs my inference when comparing to 5e was that it lacks fundemantals plumbing by comparison.

Too bad I'd rather play 2e or 1e or even C&C than 5e. But I see myself only using for 5e regularly (at least definitely to DM... gonna be trying to PLAY in other folk's spgames where they deal with a lot of the extra work and they have more knowledge to make workarounds smoother than I have.

Standards should never be relative. Compromise is another beast entirely.

[vodokar]

It is not a compromise, Var. It is the simple fact that a part time, non-paid programmer can not possibly live up to that standard you have set; not even the most experienced one we have here in our community. That is what is not fair. It was such a momentous task to make 5e do what it does that not even any of the other SmiteWorks rulesets have most of those features. 4e came the closest, but 5e has many features even it doesn't have.

What you see in 5e represents an investment of many thousands of dollars in man-hours by professional programmers. That is simply not something that can be duplicated unless there is enough money to support it.

Savage Worlds is probably the most featured after 4e, but it has taken, what?, 7 or 8 years, for all of those features to be put into place in the slick form it represents now, and that was a labor of more than one community developer over that time, as I understand it. While it hold the status of being an official ruleset, it wasn't a project done by SmiteWorks. When I first came here, SW didn't even have automation of combat. You had to manually look up the results. And many of the other features it has now, didn't exist at that point. It's been a long and intensive labor of love. Not something that one can possibly expect to find out of the gate.

If you don't believe me, go ahead and try to make a ruleset yourself. After you come up for breath after 500 hours, you won't even be close to the 5e level of functionality. Again, that's a lot to expect from someone that is doing this in their spare time for nothing and just trying to help other people out.

[Varsuuk]

First off the last sentence is whether Standards should be relative or not. They shouldn't in my opinion. If I lived in the town next to Flint Michigan and my water was 100% better than theirs but 2000% lower than scientific STANDARDS, I would not be wanting to drink that water. Relativity is, however, applicable to compromise. And you reaffirmed that by speaking about how anyone developing a ruleset needs to make compromises based on time and what needs to be there first etc. When one compromises standards because others don't X in serious matters, seriously bad things can happen. When one lowers standards due to the relative featureset of rulesets, nothing bad happens. Other than I am not going to use them for online play. Me. I. Whether that matters to anyone in a company or not depends on the call they make when they survey the field to see if others might feel the same way AND if they have the time/ability/licensing to do anything about it.

The thing is Vodokor, this thread started about DCC putting out old modules. Old Modules is what you will note that I spoke about in my last post and how I would kill to be able to play old 1e/2e modules in an FG online game. For that, I would buy a ruleset for a high price as well as PHB/MM/DMG/etc books and probably next to every module they would put out. Currently, I have bought everything put out for 5e and SW/Deadlands. I've bought C&C and a couple modules. Buying Hall of the Halflings because I want to run this with my son to try to get him into AD&D via "online" play since that is what he is now used to at 10years old. I would buy an AD&D ruleset from SW for 39-49$ but whether I would use it for online play or not depends on if it was so smooth and silky as to be usable that way. Doug pointed out some very serious stumbling blocks like "wording" for matching. Probably another discussion for another time because one of the solutions, refactoring wording in those editions would be unacceptable to one or both parties. So yeah, it is probably never (not due to technical reasons - they COULD handle all the differences, they have the talent-set - its the time/effort/reward thing) going to happen even if licensing were not an issue.

This thread did not start about you or your ruleset (which I think looks great actually.) You talk again about fairness comparing your resources/time to the SW devs and the hours spent challenging me to do so. I would love to try for just the fun of it (which, I might add was YOUR purported reason as a learning/bonding experience for you and your son) and I may someday but I will never finish because I know I do not have to time to spend on it enough to keep up with underlying changes AS I tried to do it ;P Hell, SW would be on Unity FG 4.5 before I was done with first Beta probably.

This thread is NOT about you or your ruleset. I wish you would stop taking these threads to be about that. It if not "unfair" to want SMITEWORKS to put out a feature-complete AD&D ruleset. It WOULD be "unfair" to ask YOU to do so. I am not holding your ruleset to a standard you cannot meet. You are taking my standard for SW and shoving it on top of your work. I am speaking to SW and you didn't come into my request to them specifically asking them to try interests with Kickstarter etc.

I am glad you did what you did, it gives me something to play with some time. As you may have noticed I was super pumped to try "Against the Giants" on FGCon with your ruleset until I found wife bought tickets for the "Circus 1903" play/circus at Madison Square Garden for the same damn night.

I am just NEVER going to have the time to efficiently (low art skill for maps editing makes that a chore as I found out converting N1 and Starter Adventures) convert the old AD&D modules I want to FG. I need either crowdsourcing (not possible because of IP) or Smiteworks' licensed modules coming out in between 5e releases. I'd buy nearly every one of them (all the Greyhawk & generic ones, some FR (I played most all with my group already, may grab for completeness or to heavily modify maybe...)) as they came out. No question.

But if SW or even your ruleset was 100% as featured as 5e, it would not be enough for me to use for online play (I would happily use the ruleset alone to help track the game but that is not a big cash-win for SW, no continuing income) without those modules I loved. Don't address this with all the new OSRs out there, there may be tons and some may be as good as those from the masters etc... but I can't walk into The Compleat strategist and examine them and discuss with the owners/clerks the merits/styles etc, and they do not have the thematic backing of a single company creating a single expansive game world. I'd have to do the work anyway to port to GH or whatever. I am not in my youth or college days. I just don't have the time. Thurs night, I left the office at 8:30PM because some of the banking firms were running tests against my new FIX gateway (55us RT improvement!!!!!! reported :) ) and Fri I worked from home because I had to do analysis and conference calls AND be there for my son's 10th birthday party. Not to mention having to do PT for like 2 1+hour sessions a day...joy of I guess easily injuring oneself post-50. I got no time, I have some money, I need to pay a company to put out the modules from 1e/2e that I want because I will never finish them myself.

I love how 5e tracks weapon type damage, spell dmg type resists, handles my Heavy Armor Feat (dmg resistance based on type), Savage Attacker (rerolls of 1,2 one time), autosaving throws. Drag and drop of items/skills. Depth of items/spells/npc creation, etc. Identify systems, and so much more (these are only things that popped in my head from my recent play - not order of importance or even mentioning things probably more important to me.)

It IS fair to expect that for a professionally done AD&D from Smiteworks. From anyone else, I use what is put out or I do not. I certainly do not go to their threads to demand feature I am not writing or paying for. Never have. It is more than fair to let SW know what I want and THAT is what this thread is about. It is you who is talking about your ruleset. I am speaking about a theoretical (only, most likely) ruleset.


---Dan


PS - If we MUST talk about yours: If you stick with it and in 7-8 years get it to today's 5e level of automation, I will likely end up using it for in-person play assuming I am able to continue a steady in person play campaign (easier to do that online.) But... there is always a chance that in 7-8 years, the Smiteworks-made (you know, professionals with inside track, staffing and access to WotC) ruleset of 5 or 6e is like frigging 3D with full spell effects and voice activated where you can cast augury and it tells you about how the next room is filled with a half dozen Sharks with FRIKKIN Lasers strapped to their heads. Then... "fair" or not, I'll probably have THAT as my new standard...

[Andraax]

So, you're saying that only one ruleset - 5E - is "feature complete"? I call BS.

[Varsuuk]

So, you're saying that only one ruleset - 5E - is "feature complete"? I call BS.

I'm not saying 5e is "feature complete" (it isn't, it has a lot of features that others do not, but "complete" is hard to judge as it is a moving target since they add to it and since some things cannot be modeled on a compute without like umm scientists and crays maybe.)
From all I wrote "5e is only feature complete ruleset" is ALL you think to sum it up? I would sum it up as "I want a ruleset for AD&D that is automated and supported like 5e WITH a regular stream of old TSR modules coming out time to time for it and I would gladly fund a Kickstarter to get it and hope others would be as interested should they (unlikely) get the license for it"



I am saying I want that level of automation against the rules of the game.
Savage Worlds seemed better than CnC by a good deal as well. And I am more likely to want to play CnC than Savage Worlds since it is my comfort-zone of Fantasy RPGs. Though I really loved SW for Deadlands and in theory, Zombie fun if I ever get to try that.

I WANT to love CnC but so far was underwhelmed because I have only experience with 5e on FG. I will still likely PLAY CnC more and hope to get good enough at it to use it online for the CnC modules I own and plan on buying.

But you can DEFINITELY let me know what others are as good in feature-completeness to 5e. I've NEVER touched 4e game or online. 3.5 I have only loaded and looked at to compare to how CnC works and look at character creation. But again, without the prebuilt modules, I wasn't as likely to use it. I do not have 500 hours to put into a ruleset, especially because after it I don't have that much time to put into making modules for adventures. But even without the ruleset build time (assuming I can even get my head around all the xml-y stuff ;), I am a C++ guy and I am getting old and slower at learning prob ;P) - I just want to PLAY. I have not the time to run modules I have to create. That is why I am excited about trying a new CnC Greyhawk game. I don't have to write the stuff for it. Maybe when (and I hope I do) I play it I will find it is not so hard adjusting manually for all the things that are not automated and it does not bog the game down. I might be a pessimist there.

But, CnC does NOT appear to come close to 5e in ease.

Did I say I compared to all, or inferred it due to my convoluted prose? I am sorry if I did. In fact, I like the CnC game itself and bought the ruleset, thinking at first I needed to have it to play - didn't know only DM needed. Since then I am glad because I have converted modules for CnC and would have needed anyway. I didn't know much about Savage Worlds but the Zombie modules (I had gotten into TWD late and was on a high) looked like I'd love to play them and I said heck, it's cheap and bought the SW ruleset. Then got tempted after reading a DL pdf and bought the whole set of those in case I could get my friends to try that online even if we continued our AD&D in person. I had a lot of fun at the 2 FGCons I played more "modern" SW games (Fugheddaboutit and Magnificent 7 (DL based))

[damned]

Guys keep the tone and the discussion civil and friendly please.

[vodokar]

Var (Dan), I'm sorry if I read something into what you said that you didn't mean. I really did, sort of, feel that you were implying that all rulesets other than 5e, which would include mine by definition, were a compromise and didn't meet your standards. I wasn't taking it personally or anything, but simply was trying to point out that there is a reason they can't compare. At any rate, how can I not agree with what you've said? Who wouldn't want what you've asked for? It is unfortunately just pie in the sky though. At any rate, please forgive me.

One thing, and you may already know this and just choose not to by preference, but I'll let you know anyway, you don't have to go to all that prep work in order to run a module in FG. What I mean is, it isn't necessary to import every scrap of text and make it fancy like you would for publication of a salable product. That takes way too long to do. Most of the experienced GM's only add the playable parts in FG. I spend, generally, 3 - 4 hours prepping a standard 20+ page adventure module for my own use. I only add maps, chat box text, treasure parcels and combat encounters. During play I read from the hard copy. That's what works for me. Maybe it might work for you.

I want my Sharks with Frikken Lasers strapped to their heads. Can we kickstart that? :D

[Varsuuk]

Var (Dan), I'm sorry if I read something into what you said that you didn't mean. I really did, sort of, feel that you were implying that all rulesets other than 5e, which would include mine by definition, were a compromise and didn't meet your standards. I wasn't taking it personally or anything, but simply was trying to point out that there is a reason they can't compare. At any rate, how can I not agree with what you've said? Who wouldn't want what you've asked for? It is unfortunately just pie in the sky though. At any rate, please forgive me.

One thing, and you may already know this and just choose not to by preference, but I'll let you know anyway, you don't have to go to all that prep work in order to run a module in FG. What I mean is, it isn't necessary to import every scrap of text and make it fancy like you would for publication of a salable product. That takes way too long to do. Most of the experienced GM's only add the playable parts in FG. I spend, generally, 3 - 4 hours prepping a standard 20+ page adventure module for my own use. I only add maps, chat box text, treasure parcels and combat encounters. During play I read from the hard copy. That's what works for me. Maybe it might work for you.

I want my Sharks with Frikken Lasers strapped to their heads. Can we kickstart that? :D


Ya, seriously - all it was about is wanting (and knowing I won't get but if one doesn't speak one can never win Lotto...or some such mixed metaphor) SW to get license for AD&D and ability to produce older modules for a ruleset and in addition, I spoke about how I wanted an official ruleset with full on SW developer support so it CAN be as automated as 5e (Doug pointed out one big stickler, their 5e ruleset depends on PDFs etc having stat-blocks and spell descriptions, npcs etc using standard layouts/keywords - something the looks like it was run on a mimeograph 1e rules certainly did not aspire to have)

So yeah, likely we will have to depend on homemade rulesets like yours and potentially Cel's but none of which will have legal old TSR modules for it (unless one makes their own. *sad panda face*)

Yeah, I know I could (text of adventure) but honestly, I convered N1: Against the Cult of the Reptile God from PDF to Story entries (just the text, no encounter/art/map links) in 2 nights of cut and paste (found that MAC workaround for cut and paste was GOLD and now prefer than Windows since it removes double spaces etc AS it pastes to FG!) and Starter Adventures I did the text of in one night.

It's the fiddling with maps and sizing and graphing and removing stuff for player maps and adjusting for mistakes in maps to text and then NPCs, treasure etc that takes my time.

[Varsuuk]

Ps

18421


Delivery came so didn't have time to look for the colored laser pointers Alex had bah too hungry

[vodokar]

I will admit that editing of a "dm" map to put ito "player" format can take considerable time. No doubt. Practice can make it go faster, but still.

No one ever said that it wasn't much easier and better if we can get professionally made modules, but, at least knowing some of the efficient work-arounds, in lieu of that, can be helpful.

A shark with a laser gun on its head, lol. Cool.

[Myrdin Potter]

I have played under the community developer DCC rules which are not very automated compared to %
5e (they do have the basic automation anything built on a base Core ruleset gets). Really does not stop you from playing and still easier than playing on an actual table with physical dice and flipping through rulebooks. Previous to that I had only used the 5e ruleset.

I really wish Goodman Games was much better at being open to VTT use and conversion.

[JohnD]

I really wish Goodman Games was much better at being open to VTT use and conversion.

Perhaps their loot vault is already full and they have more gold spittoons than they need.

It is always strange when people don't want your money... free market reigns and all that.

[leozelig]

Even with their support for the ruleset, it would probably remain automation-lite compared to 5e unless someone like JPG took it over. The rulebook and maybe some adventures would be available for purchase, but otherwise, you would get the same ruleset features.

[Varsuuk]

Prob'ly.
Although, the deal-maker for me would be TSR modules. Getting licensing for that is what would get me to buy EVERYTHING.

And if SW were the developers, JPG might be doing it, which is the point. But still, for me key is the availability of profess SW-quality TSR modules. OSR stuff could also be made outside of SW and sold.

But, it is about the modules.

Regards,
---Vars (conjunction-abuser)

[Talyn]

...if SW were the developers, JPG might be doing it, which is the point...

I'd still say extremely automation-lite, though. The development tends to go where the sales are, hence 5E. Pathfinder got a little bit of extra work, predicting an influx of sales when the official PF DLC arrives. That's about it, unless something breaks.

It's a moot point for 2017, though—they've already stated no more rulesets this year. Their plates are full at the moment.

I was considering doing Goodman's C&C modules briefly, til I found out they have been thus far refusing to license with SmiteWorks. Screw 'em. Get with the times or get left behind, I say.

[L. R. Ballard]

I really wish Goodman Games was much better at being open to VTT use and conversion.

Goodman knows they're good at publishing print and PDF gaming materials, and they have worldwide product placement on store shelves. The VTT niche is likely too small for them to consider designing for at the moment. They probably prefer to keep design in house and have neither staff nor budget available for VTT. Fantasy Grounds has a learning curve, too, so VTT design is an expensive proposition for a comparably lesser return on investment than print/PDF products.

Clearly, for a smaller third-party designer, VTT design is worth a try given the numbers of FG users clamoring for the right kind of product.

[Talyn]

Goodman (or any other studio) doesn't have to "design" anything for VTT. RPG writers and designers just write and design books, they don't know diddly about coding for electronic media. The RPG studios simply have to be open to the idea and willing to forge a business relationship with [insert VTT studios here] and a licensing agreement for their content.

Wizards of the Coast isn't coding 5E modules for Fantasy Grounds, a couple SmiteWorks developers and a couple community developers are. Same with Savage Worlds, Pathfinder, Castles & Crusades, Call of Cthulhu and every other system/studio that has licensed with SmiteWorks.

[L. R. Ballard]

Goodman (or any other studio) doesn't have to "design" anything for VTT. RPG writers and designers just write and design books, they don't know diddly about coding for electronic media. The RPG studios simply have to be open to the idea and willing to forge a business relationship with [insert VTT studios here] and a licensing agreement for their content.

Wizards of the Coast isn't coding 5E modules for Fantasy Grounds, a couple SmiteWorks developers and a couple community developers are. Same with Savage Worlds, Pathfinder, Castles & Crusades, Call of Cthulhu and every other system/studio that has licensed with SmiteWorks.

Precisely, and that's why I suggested that Goodman prefers--perhaps idiosyncratically--to keep layouts in house.

[Talyn]

Which is why I say "screw 'em!" :)

[L. R. Ballard]

Which is why I say "screw 'em!" :)

Fair enough, though they probably don't want you doing that, even if you're doing it on SmiteWorks' behalf. :p