I have been assigned a little workshop (35 minutes) at Lucca Games about the retrogaming phenomenon and so I wondered: what was the very first retro clone game? The Goodman Games DCC line is surely retro, but it's not a game. Perhaps Castles and Crusades could be considered as such?

Ak'Ptui wrote:Hi,
You need to distinguish between retro-clone (games which closely emulate the mechanics of the originals) and retro-style (games which try and capture the feel of the originals using different mechanics).  

Well, the workshop is about retrogaming in general, so I don't think about any clear cut division so far. But yours is an interesting point  

serleran wrote:Tunnels and Trolls.

Pity I can't say EPT as a riposte since both EGG and DA stated that was better than D&D and y'know a retroclone can't be. *ducks*

As Ak'ptui says, if you're asking about the first "clone" game specifically, it depends on the definition of "clone," which I would say rests on the idea of specifically going after non-copyrightable rules of an old game, not just using the SRD to get an approximation of the "feel."

So, I'd say that there's kind of a spectrum. Hackmaster fits in there, although there is a strong parody element that makes it a bit different. C&C came next (I think), but was more about "feel" than "rules." BFRPG, I think, ventured into clone territory without the specific legal definitions, but was probably the first real stab at getting close to cloning. OSRIC was next, definitely the first all-out clone. Then LL, another all-out clone. Next big one in terms of reception was probably S&W, which is a clone but not totally all-out like OSRIC and LL, mainly due to the nature of the underlying game, which contained less SRD-covered material (and also just reflects my legal caution). Jim Raggi's game is the most recent, and I haven't read it yet since I am still polishing the "Complete" S&W rules and I don't want to accidentally import something I read. My understanding is that it's not aimed at being a clone but is specifically designed to be like BFRPG, possibly with more focus on across the board compatibility than BFRPG had.

Each of those clones not only has a different game underlying (except BFRPG and LL, which both clone Moldvay Basic), but also a different set of goals and approaches to achieving those goals. OSRIC has been very much a reference for publishers although it is played and used as an "intro." LL is in stores and working from the "make it a living game" approach. Swords & Wizardry similar to LL on that front. BFRPG very non-profit focused, but same "living game" strategy. Raggi's game is focused more on across-the-board compatibility more than on the specific game, at least so far from what I can see.

I think you covered it there.

My opinion is that Hackmaster is a special case and I wouldn't mention it.

My historical summary would go like this.

=====================
In the mid 2000's Castle & Crusade was released by Troll Lord Games. It designed to feel like the old AD&D 1st edition and was deliberately designed to allow easy use of older adventures with the system. Some folks felt that C&C did not go far enough and that the OGL allowed them to achieve a far closer emulation. This team of individual produced OSRIC emulating AD&D 1st edition and it is considered the first true retro-clone.

Since then several retro-clone have been released emulating various editions of D&D. Of these BFRPG, Labyrinth Lord, and Swords & Wizardry are the most notable. Development of new retro-clones continues today with the introduction of Dark Dungeons, and the Loftp RPG. Although most supplement and adventure development focuses on one of the big three; OSRIC, LL, and S&W.
=======================

robertsconley wrote:My opinion is that Hackmaster is a special case and I wouldn't mention it.

Why not? It seems to fit all aspects of your own definition.

There are a number of non-D&D retro-clones out there, too, if you're interested in the wider scope of genres being emulated....

sauromatian wrote:
Why not? It seems to fit all aspects of your own definition.

Because it wasn't under the Open Gaming License. Nobody could support it outside of Kenzer Co so it's subsequent impact is minimal.  If you look at the current efforts of the retro-clone community there is  a clear line through OSRIC to Castle & Crusade with separate streams entering from places like the Dragonsfoot community, OD&Dities, etc. Kenzer Co's Hackmaster is own separate thing. A separation that only reinforced by Hackmaster BASIC.

Sardan wrote:I don't know.  At the time of 3ed D&D and before the retro-clone phenomena there seemed (to me at least) to be a rise in nostalgia for D&D.  We saw Hackmaster which as (1st + 2nd AD&D) x wackiness but whose point was in many ways to simulate a characiture of "old skool" gaming while using the AD&D mechanics.

There are a lot of people who enjoyed Hackmaster 4th ed. Many who played it straight as a continuation of AD&D. But none of the current efforts in retro clone can be traced directly back to Hackmaster and Kenzer Co.

Sardan wrote:You also had Goodman Games with their Dungeon Crawl Classics and Necromancer Games with, "3rd ed rules 1st edition feel".

Now in contrast Hackmaster many retro-clone authors, and bloggers were involved in this, myself included. It took OSRIC to make most of realize that we don't have to stop at Old School Feel but proceed onto direct support of older edition both commercially and non-commercially.

Castles & Crusades is important because the fallout of it's development lead to OSRIC.

Sardan wrote:Now I think we would probably still have had the retro clones without those things -

IMO, probably would be a bunch of C&C like RPGs along with non-commerical places like Dragonsfoot and Star Frontiersmen. That fact the developers of OSRIC were willing to put the time both writing and on the legal side is what broke things wide open.

Sardan wrote:I think the internet has been a big factor in uniting the "old school" community" - but the fact is we did have those things and I think the fact that there was room for those products in the marketplace encouraged the likes of Troll Lord Games to release C&C (which is after all a 3rd ed simulation of AD&D)

I agree the internet is absolutely critical in this whole process. The only thing I would add is that specifically the rise of Print on Demand technology and RPG PDF marketplaces are crucial to the way the retro-clone market is today. For a brief time the availability of PDFs of the back catalog of TSR was also a major boon to the old school hobby.