# PSA: "Dead" games are still playable



## Reynard

Tangentially related to the OGL 1.1 kerfuffle, but more broadly applicable.

Just because a game is not currently supported by its creator or publisher does not mean that you can't play it. Just because only a small community of folks keep it alive doesn't mean you can't find players. just because you have to make your own "supplements" doesn't mean it isn't worth it.

If you love a game, don't stop supporting and playing it just because the company stops supporting it or it gets "de-authorized" or whatever.


----------



## aco175

I am not sure my table could go back to play 1e/2e- maybe 3e/Pathfinder.  Every change brings in some new rules and options that stick for a reason and to make a play at 2e and still have things like THAC0 and no feats and the d20 system for stats would be a big step back.  I have not looked much at some of the new remakes of the OSE and such so they may have changed enough from the original to be its own game by now.


----------



## Reynard

aco175 said:


> I am not sure my table could go back to play 1e/2e- maybe 3e/Pathfinder.  Every change brings in some new rules and options that stick for a reason and to make a play at 2e and still have things like THAC0 and no feats and the d20 system for stats would be a big step back.  I have not looked much at some of the new remakes of the OSE and such so they may have changed enough from the original to be its own game by now.



I'm not really talking about "going back." I'm talking about abandoning a game because it has run its publication course or the company goes under or whatever.


----------



## Bedrockgames

I still play 2E pretty exclusively when I do D&D


----------



## Celebrim

I'm often surprised by how big the Star Wars D6 community still is despite the fact that it's dead and despite me realizing just how poor the editing of the original game line actually was.  Like the IP content is still really well done, but the rules themselves show no sign of having any product manager or editor creating guidelines for rules leading to it feeling like all equipment, vehicles, starships, droids, and alien creatures have stats generated by a random number generator.


----------



## Reynard

Celebrim said:


> I'm often surprised by how big the Star Wars D6 community still is despite the fact that it's dead and despite me realizing just how poor the editing of the original game line actually was.  Like the IP content is still really well done, but the rules themselves show no sign of having any product manager or editor creating guidelines for rules leading to it feeling like all equipment, vehicles, starships, droids, and alien creatures have stats generated by a random number generator.



I still run it at cons on a regular basis and always fill seats.


----------



## payn

If your company gets sued out of business, I guess you can just keep doing the work for no pay.


----------



## Retreater

It sure makes it harder when the tools you're accustomed to using get taken away: character builders, encounter calculators, PDFs, messageboards, etc. 
In many cases, it's simpler to find a new game.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Retreater said:


> It sure makes it harder when the tools you're accustomed to using get taken away: character builders, encounter calculators, PDFs, messageboards, etc.
> In many cases, it's simpler to find a new game.



A lot of games have character builders these days


----------



## GMMichael

Reynard said:


> If you love a game, don't stop supporting and playing it just because the company stops supporting it or it gets "de-authorized" or whatever.



This might not be the actual issue though.  Yeah, you-singular can keep playing a game.  By yourself.  But there's a mass market out there, and it responds to what advertisers are telling it, right here, right now.  

"Hey local game community, let's try a game of (dead game)!"

"Yeah, sorry, we just got the sample app of the new 1D&D game through Facecrack, and our dragonborn-species paladins can't level up unless we use the QR codes in the new player's handbook *copyright *trademark *all rights reserved.  Maybe next time?"


----------



## Reynard

GMMichael said:


> This might not be the actual issue though.  Yeah, you-singular can keep playing a game.  By yourself.  But there's a mass market out there, and it responds to what advertisers are telling it, right here, right now.
> 
> "Hey local game community, let's try a game of (dead game)!"
> 
> "Yeah, sorry, we just got the sample app of the new 1D&D game through Facecrack, and our dragonborn-species paladins can't level up unless we use the QR codes in the new player's handbook *copyright *trademark *all rights reserved.  Maybe next time?"



None of that has anything to do with what I was talking about.


----------



## Umbran

Reynard said:


> None of that has anything to do with what I was talking about.




It seems to me it speaks rather directly to your assertion: "...doesn't mean you can't find players."


----------



## Reynard

Umbran said:


> It seems to me it speaks rather directly to your assertion: "...doesn't mean you can't find players"



The internet is a big place. It's not like LFG for dead games isn't already a thing.


----------



## Umbran

Reynard said:


> The internet is a big place. It's not like LFG for dead games isn't already a thing.




So, first, I don't get what you mean by this.  Could you please rephrase it?

As you do so, please remember that I was responding to "none of that has anything to do with what I said."  

If what you want to say is that game stores are not the only place to find games, that's fine.  But noting there are other solutions to the problem is not the same as saying that their statement isn't even on the same subject matter.


----------



## DarkCrisis

aco175 said:


> I am not sure my table could go back to play 1e/2e- maybe 3e/Pathfinder.  Every change brings in some new rules and options that stick for a reason and to make a play at 2e and still have things like THAC0 and no feats and the d20 system for stats would be a big step back.  I have not looked much at some of the new remakes of the OSE and such so they may have changed enough from the original to be its own game by now.




My table went back to 2E.  3 of the 5 players only ever played 5th.  2 of those 3 love it due to the increased grit.  The lone hold out just feels her character is underpowered (she always plays Druids).  I've been loving it as the DM.


----------



## John Dallman

GMMichael said:


> This might not be the actual issue though.  Yeah, you-singular can keep playing a game.  By yourself.  But there's a mass market out there, and it responds to what advertisers are telling it, right here, right now.



That depends if you are a group that wants to keep on playing said game. If you are, it's easy enough.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg

payn said:


> If your company gets sued out of business, I guess you can just keep doing the work for no pay.


----------



## Reynard

Umbran said:


> So, first, I don't get what you mean by this.  Could you please rephrase it?
> 
> As you do so, please remember that I was responding to "none of that has anything to do with what I said."
> 
> If what you want to say is that game stores are not the only place to find games, that's fine.  But noting there are other solutions to the problem is not the same as saying that their statement isn't even on the same subject matter.



The post I responded to did not say anything about game stores. It intimated -- oddly -- that folks were too deluded by social media to want to do anything but the new thing. That wasn't really relevant to my initial post -- which was that despite a game being discontinued or otherwise dead, you can still play it.

This thread was in response to people on these boards saying things like they are abandoning levelUp because it might be "de-authorized" or whatever. That's ridiculous, even if that were to happen.


----------



## Reynard

payn said:


> If your company gets sued out of business, I guess you can just keep doing the work for no pay.



What does that even mean in the context of this thread?


----------



## payn

Reynard said:


> What does that even mean in the context of this thread?



It's the point of folks concern that you seemed to completely have missed.


----------



## Umbran

Reynard said:


> The post I responded to did not say anything about game stores.




Sorry.  It said "local game community".  Is that difference material to the discussion? 



Reynard said:


> It intimated -- oddly -- that folks were too deluded by social media to want to do anything but the new thing. That wasn't really relevant to my initial post -- which was that despite a game being discontinued or otherwise dead, you can still play it.




You asserted one can find players.  He pushed back that finding players can be difficult, because they are engaged with the new bright and shiny thing.  Whether it is social media based or not is colorful, but ultimately irrelevant.

How is players being engaged in other things "not relevant" to finding players?  It isn't like folks have infinite time for gaming - if they are using that time on the new shiny thing, and don't want to leave it, you can't have them at your table for an old thing, can you?

Note Being _wrong_ about folks being engaged in other things is not the same as saying that engagement _isn't relevant_ to the problem.


----------



## MGibster

In my experience, while it's not impossible to find players for a dead game, it's more of an uphill battle.  To start with, it can be somewhat difficult to find players for games other than D&D.  And now I'm going to ask them to play a game that's been out of print for who knows how long and they may never have heard of?  It gets a lot more difficult to get people to try.


----------



## Reynard

payn said:


> It's the point of folks concern that you seemed to completely have missed.



What? A need for a constant flow of new product? The whole point of my post was to remind people that is unnecessary. The vast majority of work done in RPGs is done by the people at the table, not the companies that create them.


----------



## Reynard

MGibster said:


> In my experience, while it's not impossible to find players for a dead game, it's more of an uphill battle.  To start with, it can be somewhat difficult to find players for games other than D&D.  And now I'm going to ask them to play a game that's been out of print for who knows how long and they may never have heard of?  It gets a lot more difficult to get people to try.



I did not mean to say or suggest it was automatic. I'm saying they are there.


----------



## payn

Reynard said:


> What? A need for a constant flow of new product? The whole point of my post was to remind people that is unnecessary. The vast majority of work done in RPGs is done by the people at the table, not the companies that create them.



"your problem doesn't matter because I dont have it." is very tone deaf on the subject.


----------



## Reynard

payn said:


> "your problem doesn't matter because I dont have it." is very tone deaf on the subject.



Seriously? So you disagree with the premise of the thread: a game that is no longer supported is unplayable. Congratulations. Anything else to contribute?


----------



## MGibster

Reynard said:


> I did not mean to say or suggest it was automatic. I'm saying they are there.



Okay, I guess we can move on to other subjects like what religion the pope is and where bears do their business.  I'm being glib, I know, but this is a website where people with more than a passing interest in RPGs come and we all know dead games can be played.  When you post something about gaming here, it's an invitation for discussion.


----------



## payn

MGibster said:


> Okay, I guess we can move on to other subjects like what religion the pope is and where bears do their business.  I'm being glib, I know, but this is a website where people with more than a passing interest in RPGs come and we all know dead games can be played.  When you post something about gaming here, it's an invitation for discussion.



QFT


----------



## Reynard

MGibster said:


> Okay, I guess we can move on to other subjects like what religion the pope is and where bears do their business.  I'm being glib, I know, but this is a website where people with more than a passing interest in RPGs come and we all know dead games can be played.  When you post something about gaming here, it's an invitation for discussion.



Well, it was started in response to people on this site talking about getting rid of their game materials because they think the game will be "killed" by the OGL mess.


----------



## CleverNickName

If you're not enjoying 5th Edition, but still want to play D&D, here are some personal favorites of mine that I can recommend.




 

 

 



Even though the books are out of print, DriveThruRPG can hook you up with everything you need.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Reynard said:


> Tangentially related to the OGL 1.1 kerfuffle, but more broadly applicable.
> 
> Just because a game is not currently supported by its creator or publisher does not mean that you can't play it. Just because only a small community of folks keep it alive doesn't mean you can't find players. just because you have to make your own "supplements" doesn't mean it isn't worth it.
> 
> If you love a game, don't stop supporting and playing it just because the company stops supporting it or it gets "de-authorized" or whatever.



Literally no human being who is aware of published games is unaware of this.


----------



## Reynard

doctorbadwolf said:


> Literally no human being who is aware of published games is unaware of this.



Really? Because I see people on this very board talk about how they will have to sell their books once the OGL goes away, and who refuse to play dead editions.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

I have a bit of a different view on this than most of you, because as a game retailer, I really _can't_ play games that I can't sell. I mean, of course I can, but it would be a really big waste of my limited time.

I actually did it (for about a decade) - I wrote my own RPG that everyone loved, and I played it at my store, but the only thing I could sell for it was dice. (It was ready to be played, but not fit for publication - I suppose I could have polished it up, but I was too busy playing it (and starting a family) to do that. 

I got smart and stopped playing it when 4e came out (and sold a LOT more 4e than I did 3e because of it). I haven't gone back. I now must move forward. I miss my game, but what can ya do.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Reynard said:


> Really?



Yes. Objectively.


Reynard said:


> Because I see people on this very board talk about how they will have to sell their books once the OGL goes away, and who refuse to play dead editions.



I haven't seen anyone actually say that, but I don't doubt some folks will do that. They are fully aware that they could instead choose to keep playing an unsupported game that will have left a bad taste after a predatory action by the publishing company. 

The fact people make decisions you don't agree with or understand doesn't mean they are unaware of basic fundamental facts, and it is obnoxiously condescending to imply that they are.


----------



## Reynard

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yes. Objectively.
> 
> I haven't seen anyone actually say that, but I don't doubt some folks will do that. They are fully aware that they could instead choose to keep playing an unsupported game that will have left a bad taste after a predatory action by the publishing company.
> 
> The fact people make decisions you don't agree with or understand doesn't mean they are unaware of basic fundamental facts, and it is obnoxiously condescending to imply that they are.



You know, just because you read the OP in the worst way possible doesn't mean it was intended that way.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Reynard said:


> You know, just because you read the OP in the worst way possible doesn't mean it was intended that way.



More importantly, just because you didn't intend a statement you made to be insulting or condescending, doesn't mean that it wasn't, or that you aren't still responsible for your own words.


----------



## Scribe

The whole 'dead game' thing is an interesting phenomenon. If you only play with your own group of friends, then yes, its never 'dead'. There is something to be said however for a global, or large, living community to engage with, interact with, 'talk shop' and essentially share with.

When a game is 'dead' that is harder to get.


----------



## CleverNickName

Scribe said:


> The whole 'dead game' thing is an interesting phenomenon. If you only play with your own group of friends, then yes, its never 'dead'. There is something to be said however for a global, or large, living community to engage with, interact with, 'talk shop' and essentially share with.
> 
> When a game is 'dead' that is harder to get.



I think the issue is that some people _really want it to be dead, _and are willing to take great leaps of logic to believe it.


----------



## Scribe

CleverNickName said:


> I think the issue is that some people _really want it to be dead, _and are willing to take great leaps of logic to believe it.




100%.

I've played online 'dead' games with concurrent, online, verifiable, thousands of users that (if one were so inclined) you could verify by talking to in real time.

Those games were decried as 'dead' by people playing them, at that moment, within that online space, because thousands was not TENS of thousands.

I dont know why people like to do that, but I assume its just trolls trolling most of the time.


----------



## Bedrockgames

GMMichael said:


> This might not be the actual issue though.  Yeah, you-singular can keep playing a game.  By yourself.  But there's a mass market out there, and it responds to what advertisers are telling it, right here, right now.
> 
> "Hey local game community, let's try a game of (dead game)!"
> 
> "Yeah, sorry, we just got the sample app of the new 1D&D game through Facecrack, and our dragonborn-species paladins can't level up unless we use the QR codes in the new player's handbook *copyright *trademark *all rights reserved.  Maybe next time?"




I think though people often talk themselves out of trying because they think it will be too hard. I am not saying suggesting a game like TORG* or AD&D 1E is going to be an easier sell than 5E, but I have had a lot of success myself suggesting older RPGs to my groups. Another thing to consider is it is easier than ever to connect with people who play games your regular game group don't play. When I first learned about Savage Worlds (which is still very much a game that alive and supported) I had trouble finding players I knew who were into it, but after ten minutes looking online I found a group two towns over and joined in with them. There are plenty of people who still play older editions of D&D especially. 4E has its fans, 3E still has players (and Pathfinder is still around), 2E has been getting a bit more popular than it was in the past, 1E is easy to get players for, as are most versions of basic. When you venture beyond D&D it can be trickier but far from impossible. 

*Not sure if this one is back in production or not


----------



## Bedrockgames

DarkCrisis said:


> My table went back to 2E.  3 of the 5 players only ever played 5th.  2 of those 3 love it due to the increased grit.  The lone hold out just feels her character is underpowered (she always plays Druids).  I've been loving it as the DM.




I've been very impressed by how well 2E holds up whenever I go back to it.


----------



## Celebrim

Bedrockgames said:


> I've been very impressed by how well 2E holds up whenever I go back to it.




As long as no one wants to play a thief, you'll probably be OK.


----------



## Cruentus

CleverNickName said:


> If you're not enjoying 5th Edition, but still want to play D&D, here are some personal favorites of mine that I can recommend.
> 
> View attachment 271473 View attachment 271474 View attachment 271475 View attachment 271476
> 
> DriveThruRPG can hook you up.



Agree.  And I’d add OSE and OSE Advanced as well.  We went “back” to Basic and then onto OSE, and are sticking there. 

Strangely enough, engaging with and interacting with the ‘worldwide community’ has soured a lot at our table to 5e, so there can be good and bad.  The latest rounds of doom and gloom don’t really help overall.  Granted, there is a lot of great info out there, and it might take some time to find it, but I also don‘t think that changes to the OGL will prevent the sharing of ideas around TTRPGs and DnD in particular.  YMMV.  

Our table left 5e and the WOTC bandwagon (after really getting rolling back when Ad&d was introduced, so 40+ years of playing) and aren’t looking back.


----------



## soviet

I run 'dead' games all the time - WFRP 1e, AD&D 2e, MERP/RM2. I find quite often new editions are worse designs.


----------



## dagger

Bedrockgames said:


> I've been very impressed by how well 2E holds up whenever I go back to it.



Best thing about 1e and 2e is every spell, class, monster, item, adventure, campaign setting, race, skill system, and everything else is compatible for either. Its basically the same system. For example, I run 1e but use 2e Monster Manuals and campaign settings.


----------



## soviet

That said my D&D group (that I've run the above games for) do seem to be unduly influenced by what's current. Our main campaign (in which I am a player) has run from 2e in 1990 through 3e, 3.5, 4e, and now 5e - whatever's current. Each time we seem to adopt the new version without reflection and despite my best efforts to switch to 2e it seems we can never go back. This is always the best edition until it's replaced and then it was terrible, let's use the new one. We have always been at war with Eurasia. I'm sure we'll switch to D&D!one!eleven! or whatever when it comes out too.


----------



## MGibster

Scribe said:


> The whole 'dead game' thing is an interesting phenomenon. If you only play with your own group of friends, then yes, its never 'dead'. There is something to be said however for a global, or large, living community to engage with, interact with, 'talk shop' and essentially share with.
> 
> When a game is 'dead' that is harder to get.



The definition of a dead game has always been clear to me.  When a game is no longer supported by the publisher, it's dead.  The definition never had anything to do with whether people still played the game.


----------



## overgeeked

aco175 said:


> 2e and still have things like THAC0 and no feats and the d20 system for stats would be a big step back



THAC0 is simple to convert. For AD&D and 2E it’s: 20 - DAC = AAC. 

DAC is descending AC. 

AAC is ascending AC.

Feats you can homebrew or port over. Check out Skills & Powers. The seeds are there. 

d20 system for stats? You mean ability checks? AD&D and 2E had those. Roll 1d20 and compare it to your stat. Roll equal to or under, you succeed. For over, you fail. Late AD&D and 2E had a skill system.


----------



## DarkCrisis

Celebrim said:


> As long as no one wants to play a thief, you'll probably be OK.



In my 2E game, the Thief is loving it.  Sneak master!  and loves disabling traps.  Not so great at combat though.... but thats what multiclassing is for


----------



## John Dallman

soviet said:


> That said my D&D group (that I've run the above games for) do seem to be unduly influenced by what's current. Our main campaign (in which I am a player) has run from 2e in 1990 through 3e, 3.5, 4e, and now 5e - whatever's current. Each time we seem to adopt the new version without reflection and despite my best efforts to switch to 2e it seems we can never go back. This is always the best edition until it's replaced and then it was terrible, let's use the new one. We have always been at war with Eurasia. I'm sure we'll switch to D&D!one!eleven! or whatever when it comes out too.



The D&D groups I play with use 1e as a _lingua franca_, but have substantial amounts of OD&D, some 2e and very little BECMI in the mix. I played a bit of 3e and was not very impressed: converting characters and settings would have been a load of work, to little obvious gain. I gave up on 4e about 20 pages in. I've played two sessions of 5e, but there didn't seem to be any radical gains.

Nobody has wanted to move up editions for existing campaigns; some people have started new campaigns under new editions, but the campaigns with the long backstories remain under their original rule systems.

At least to me, using web-based character managers and other software tools provided by WotC puts you in an obviously vulnerable situation if the company wants to force an edition change. Which is plenty of reason not to use them. I've got plenty of experience doing D&D on paper, or in spreadsheets, and I'm happy to carry on that way.


----------



## Guythegard

are you kidding, it wuld be tough luke finding enuf people to play 4e with me so I never tried.


----------



## Jd Smith1

MGibster said:


> In my experience, while it's not impossible to find players for a dead game, it's more of an uphill battle.  To start with, it can be somewhat difficult to find players for games other than D&D.  And now I'm going to ask them to play a game that's been out of print for who knows how long and they may never have heard of?  It gets a lot more difficult to get people to try.



Not on-line. I play non-mainstream games, and have never had any problem finding players. In fact, I'm currently above my preferred headcount. There's a huge demand for long-term weekly campaigns.

But if you play F2F, it could definitely be a problem.


----------



## Jd Smith1

aco175 said:


> I am not sure my table could go back to play 1e/2e- maybe 3e/Pathfinder.  Every change brings in some new rules and options that stick for a reason and to make a play at 2e and still have things like THAC0 and no feats and the d20 system for stats would be a big step back.  I have not looked much at some of the new remakes of the OSE and such so they may have changed enough from the original to be its own game by now.



I'm the opposite. The overloaded garbage wagon that is 5e and its endless stream of splatbooks is exactly why I won't play any d20 system.


----------



## dagger

Celebrim said:


> As long as no one wants to play a thief, you'll probably be OK.



The Gnome Illusionist/Thief in my current game is a beast


----------



## dagger

overgeeked said:


> THAC0 is simple to convert. For AD&D and 2E it’s: 20 - DAC = AAC.
> 
> DAC is descending AC.
> 
> AAC is ascending AC.
> 
> Feats you can homebrew or port over. Check out Skills & Powers. The seeds are there.
> 
> d20 system for stats? You mean ability checks? AD&D and 2E had those. Roll 1d20 and compare it to your stat. Roll equal to or under, you succeed. For over, you fail. Late AD&D and 2E had a skill system.



Yep, 1e/2e is easy to run with THAC0 or without, or even to use Base Attack Bonus like 3e. Its all the same. I like THAC0 because the players can just tell me what AC they hit, no need for the to hit charts. But if they wanted to used Ascending BAB I could use that as well.


----------



## aramis erak

Reynard said:


> doctorbadwolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> Literally no human being who is aware of published games is unaware of this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Because I see people on this very board talk about how they will have to sell their books once the OGL goes away, and who refuse to play dead editions.
Click to expand...


That they're aware they won't be able to find players if they don't is immaterial to their being aware of the rules still being technically usable.

I have zero expectation of ever being able to get my copy of The Arcanum to table again. Not because it's a bad game, but with it being OOP, only players that already know and trust me are going to be willing to even bother trying it. 

The thought process for me with OOP games is this: If I try one someone else is running, and I want to run it too, will I be able to get a copy of my own for something even vaguely like a reasonable price? If not, I'm not interested - I don't need another grail game.
If my players want to, will they? I know a game's a hit when they buy materials for it. (L5R, 3 sessions in and EVERYONE has bought the dice for 5th... tho' 3 of the 6 have played before.) But when it goes OOP, the dice will become a hinderance to further adoption. 
Will my group enjoy it? (Their tastes and mine overlap, but far from 100%)

Likewise, I wanted to run T2K 2.0 a couple years back... but the PDF available is only 2.2, and my 2.0 dead tree was in a different state of the US. I remember _most_ of the differences, but my players would never be able to get even a PDF of 2.0. And I happen to have an in with the rights manager, and the 2.0 isn't going to get a PDF for reasons unspecified.

DragonLance 5th Age, Marvel Super Heroes Adventure Game, FFG/Edge Genesys, FFG/Edge Star Wars, FFG WFRP3, L5R 5E, and a few other games, have custom components that make use a problem. DL5A and MSHAG both use custom decks of cards - decks which WotC won't (DL5A) and can't legally (MSHAG) make available from DriveThruCards. I can find my DL5A cards, but not my MSHAG ones. Genesys, Star Wars, WFRP 3, and L5R 5E all use custom dice; only L5R is practical with a conversion mat. 

I've had players who used conversion mats for SW... they fell rapidly into three camps - 
Camp 1: bought their own dice
Camp 2: insisted on borrowing dice to play - hence why I own 8 sets of SW dice and 5 of L5R 5
Camp 3: refused to play further.
None of them wanted to use conversion mats other than in L5R - my L5R players will use a conversion mat if they forget their dice... and I have a group of dice-superstitious players. N borrows dice - tho' in the prior campaign, she had bought a set. She has issues with keeping track of things, so given the intervening years between L5R campaigns, she's misplaced her sets, so is borrowing mine for session.

When the dice are no longer available, the books become increasingly less useable over time, without regard to whether the rules aged well.


----------



## aramis erak

Bedrockgames said:


> I've been very impressed by how well 2E holds up whenever I go back to it.



And I've discovered I cannot stand it anymore, and 1E I find even worse. 
I hold no nostalgia for AD&D despite it being my first RPG. 

Not everyone thinks it holds up. Nor does everyone need to agree on whether it does or not...


overgeeked said:


> THAC0 is simple to convert. For AD&D and 2E it’s: 20 - DAC = AAC.



Technically, THAC-0 does NOT match the AD&D 1E rules. It ignores the flat spots on the tables.


----------



## Jack Daniel

Given that publishing material is lifeblood to a game, the OGL meant that games _didn't have to die anymore_.

Reminding everyone that you can just play your dead games forever is analogous to telling Olympians and Æsir with no more ambrosia or golden apples to keep everyone in their world immortal that at least they can still play _Weekend at Bernie's_ with the corpses.

Bitterness aside — and in the spirit of hope that the OGL isn't _actually_ dead and gone — THAC0 is literally just a DC. If you play 3e, 4e, or 5e, you use THAC0 already, all the time, and outside of combat even.


----------



## Bedrockgames

aramis erak said:


> And I've discovered I cannot stand it anymore, and 1E I find even worse.
> I hold no nostalgia for AD&D despite it being my first RPG.
> 
> Not everyone thinks it holds up. Nor does everyone need to agree on whether it does or not...




It is very subjective. I am not suggesting other people need to share my enjoyment of 2E. Personally I enjoyed 3rd edition, but I found 2E plays in a way that fits my style better, and even though the system is less centralized, overall I enjoy the mechanics of it more. But I still like most editions from Basic to 3E. I fell off after 3E and haven't been able to get into recent editions, but that is just personal taste.


----------



## aramis erak

Jack Daniel said:


> Given that publishing material is lifeblood to a game, the OGL meant that games _didn't have to die anymore_.



Maybe. 


Jack Daniel said:


> Bitterness aside — and in the spirit of hope that the OGL isn't _actually_ dead and gone —



Given certain elements of leaked OGL1.1 information, it's quite possible that anything released after OGL1.1 goes live, even if not D&D derived, might be forced to use OGL 1.1 for new publications. (The leak states 1.0a being no longer authorized.) I honestly expect litigation to happen to resolve the contradictory elements of 1.0a and the  issue of whether authorization can be withdrawn.


----------



## Jd Smith1

Jack Daniel said:


> Given that publishing material is lifeblood to a game, the OGL meant that games _didn't have to die anymore_.



Only for d20 games.


----------



## MGibster

Jd Smith1 said:


> Not on-line. I play non-mainstream games, and have never had any problem finding players. In fact, I'm currently above my preferred headcount. There's a huge demand for long-term weekly campaigns.



This is a good point.  If you're in San Diego, you might have some trouble finding people who want to play Living Steel, or have even ever heard of it, but online play allows you to connect with people in Dallas, Detroit, Denver, or Des Moines giving you an opportunity to play you might not otherwise have had.  Also, with the proliferation of (legal) PDFs being made available, you don't necessarily have to spend a lot of time or money to pick up old books that won't ever be printed again.  Though, I should note, it does not appear a though Living Steel is actually available at this time in PDF form.


----------



## Jd Smith1

MGibster said:


> This is a good point.  If you're in San Diego, you might have some trouble finding people who want to play Living Steel, or have even ever heard of it, but online play allows you to connect with people in Dallas, Detroit, Denver, or Des Moines giving you an opportunity to play you might not otherwise have had.  Also, with the proliferation of (legal) PDFs being made available, you don't necessarily have to spend a lot of time or money to pick up old books that won't ever be printed again.  Though, I should note, it does not appear a though Living Steel is actually available at this time in PDF form.



Ironically, I have the boxed set of Living Steel. It has narrowly avoided the trash can during the latest purges of my RPG collection.


----------



## dagger

aramis erak said:


> And I've discovered I cannot stand it anymore, and 1E I find even worse.
> I hold no nostalgia for AD&D despite it being my first RPG.
> 
> Not everyone thinks it holds up. Nor does everyone need to agree on whether it does or not...
> 
> Technically, THAC-0 does NOT match the AD&D 1E rules. It ignores the flat spots on the tables.



It's close enough, and you can use 1e or 2e monster manuals on the fly with either.


----------

