Switch Theme:

Would it be possible to "Labyrinth Lord" Rogue Trader?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Cowboy Wannabe




Sacramento

In the world of roleplaying games, there is something of a "retro-revival" going on, due in part to the dissatisfaction with D&D 4th edition, and partly due to the desire for lighter roleplaying rules. Labyrinth Lord is one of several clone rule sets, which explicitly rewrite the original D&D rules with new text, allowing you to play old modules with new and accessible rules, as well as promoting the creation of new modules, which are compatible with the original rules.

Do you think this is possible with GW games? Could someone re-write all the text to use the same mechanics to allow for backwards compatible rules supplements? In this way we could get a RT compatible Space Marine list with all current forces, or a 3rd edition squat book.

One difficulty is that GW is much tighter about IP than most other games companies are, and another is that the fluff is fairly heavily tied to the rules. For example you probably could not use "bolter" to describe a strength 4 24 inch range weapon.

There has been some interest lately in Rogue Trader, and in some circles 6th edition WHFB is popular. =I=munda is a similar area where a total rewrite might be popular.

So what do you think?

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Scyzantine Empire

I think the problem is one of scale. Rogue Trader minutely detailed the statistics and equipment of each trooper, something that more current versions of 40k has eliminated in order to field more and more models on the table and still be able to finish a game in a few hours' time. Given that Rogue Trader was a skirmish/RP game and more recent versions of 40k are definitively tabletop strategy wargames would make it difficult to convert the modern codex units, but not impossible for someone dedicated to the task.

I guess the question would really be, if you wanted to roleplay in the grimdark, why not use FFG's rules?

What harm can it do to find out? It's a question that left bruises down the centuries, even more than "It can't hurt if I only take one" and "It's all right if you only do it standing up." Terry Pratchett, Making Money

"Can a magician kill a man by magic?" Lord Wellington asked Strange. Strange frowned. He seemed to dislike the question. "I suppose a magician might," he admitted, "but a gentleman never could." Susanna Clarke Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell

DA:70+S+G+M++B++I++Pw40k94-D+++A+++/mWD160R++T(m)DM+

 
   
Made in us
Servoarm Flailing Magos







Gavin Thorne wrote:I guess the question would really be, if you wanted to roleplay in the grimdark, why not use FFG's rules?


I thought the OP's idea was make a 'retro wargame' in the same way that there are 'Retro RPG' D&D clones, although I've heard RT was somewhere between a wargame and an RPG in a lot of ways, anyway.

GW wouldn't like it, although you'd only be pushing sales (but then again, wasn't RT built around smaller armies?) by providing alternate rules for their moneymaking model lines. And, of course, the general need to defend copyright...

Neat idea, but I wonder if there's a market. I'm amazed at how big the retro-rpg D&D-clone market is, as the older D&D rules had some pretty horrible limitations of their own: very strict class roles, no/limited non-fighting skills, bad or non-existent balancing efforts. I don't remember every playing a game in the 80s that was very close to the rules-as-written as doing so would have been very not-fun. But, I have to admit, my experiences are not everyone's experiences.

Working on someting you'll either love or hate. Hopefully to be revealed by November.
Play the games that make you happy. 
   
Made in us
Speed Drybrushing






Chicago, Illinois

Part of my reasoning for writing Aetherverse the first time around was to create an ultra-customizable game that had the insane amount of customization in the old Rogue Trader rules. Even as early as 3rd, GW was cutting down options (optimists say "to make the rules more streamlined", cynics say "to make you need even more models"), and I've always liked to have as many options as possible in my gaming choices.

Rogue Trader, as has been mentioned is barely identifiable as being connected to modern 40k except insofar as it clearly contains GW-style Space Marines. This DOES neatly parallel D&D, where 4E isn't really anything like the editions before it (though the cutoff is much more recent, since 3.5 was still fairly similar to AD&D minus THAC0 which was no big loss).

I think that the big thing that will define whether or not you can successfully recreate the atmosphere of Rogue Trader depends on your outlook. Do you specifically want the rules with lots of detail, and with really customizable armies? Or do you want the fluff from that era, with Black Dark Angels, Squats, Slann, and lots of garish colors?

If you want the rules, well, there are options already out there. If you want the fluff, just use the fluff! Paint up a Space Marines army in 1st Edition colors with the jaggy camouflage, and resist the Grimdark!

Rokugnar Eldar (6500) - Wolves of Excess (2000) - Marines Diagnostica (2200)
tumblr - I paint on Twitch! - Also a Level 2 Magic Judge  
   
Made in us
Cowboy Wannabe




Sacramento

I do not know that I want any of the RT, I was just musing about the posibility really.

Usng the background with some other skirmish type rules to emulate 40k is something I think quite a number of "older" gamers want.

   
Made in in
[MOD]
Otiose in a Niche






Hyderabad, India

I call dibs on the name Battle Axe in the 401st Century.

 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






lasgunpacker wrote:In the world of roleplaying games, there is something of a "retro-revival" going on, due in part to the dissatisfaction with D&D 4th edition, and partly due to the desire for lighter roleplaying rules. Labyrinth Lord is one of several clone rule sets, which explicitly rewrite the original D&D rules with new text, allowing you to play old modules with new and accessible rules, as well as promoting the creation of new modules, which are compatible with the original rules.

Do you think this is possible with GW games? Could someone re-write all the text to use the same mechanics to allow for backwards compatible rules supplements? In this way we could get a RT compatible Space Marine list with all current forces, or a 3rd edition squat book.

One difficulty is that GW is much tighter about IP than most other games companies are, and another is that the fluff is fairly heavily tied to the rules. For example you probably could not use "bolter" to describe a strength 4 24 inch range weapon.

There has been some interest lately in Rogue Trader, and in some circles 6th edition WHFB is popular. =I=munda is a similar area where a total rewrite might be popular.

So what do you think?



Just play old school Rogue Trader or the game of your choice. I don't see a reason to reinvent the wheel if you are jonesing to play a game and don't like the way that the evolution of the game has gone.

I have the books, they are each and every one thick enough to do serious damage if you hit someone with them, so I have no desire to rewrite something that thick. SPACE HULK, Epic, titan legions, etc. GW has winners. It's not the games fault that the company is spitting on the IP. If you have a game you like, keep playing it the way you want. They don't like it, then thats thier problem. GW isn't the only one to have crapped on a goldbrick, (right mogoose, or FASA, or TSR?)


I could easily play D and D with the red, blue, and green book, and not even think twice about it.

Great games don't die, contrary to popular belief.



At Games Workshop, we believe that how you behave does matter. We believe this so strongly that we have written it down in the Games Workshop Book. There is a section in the book where we talk about the values we expect all staff to demonstrate in their working lives. These values are Lawyers, Guns and Money. 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka






Sheffield, UK

This thread so needs to be about putting David Bowie into the 40k RPG.

I'm not sure what you want to do. Do you want 4th edition Space Marine rules to work in Rogue Trader or Rogue Trader lists (say squats) to work in 4th edition?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/11/20 14:14:23


Spain in Flames: Flames of War (Spanish Civil War 1936-39) Flames of War: Czechs and Slovaks (WWI & WWII) Sheffield & Rotherham Wargames Club

"I'm cancelling you, I'm cancelling you out of shame like my subscription to White Dwarf." - Mark Corrigan: Peep Show
 
   
Made in ca
Renegade Inquisitor with a Bound Daemon





Tied and gagged in the back of your car

George Spiggott wrote:This thread so needs to be about putting David Bowie into the 40k RPG.


I was thinking (and hoping) the same thig.
   
Made in gb
Junior Officer with Laspistol





Sheffield, England

I really don't think we need to see more of this:


The 28mm Titan Size Comparison Guide
Building a titan? Make sure you pick the right size for your war engine!

 
   
Made in us
Speed Drybrushing






Chicago, Illinois

Come on, this is a discussion about 40k. Do it right:


Rokugnar Eldar (6500) - Wolves of Excess (2000) - Marines Diagnostica (2200)
tumblr - I paint on Twitch! - Also a Level 2 Magic Judge  
   
Made in gb
Elite Tyranid Warrior






You could probably just play RT as is. Unlike newer versions of 40k, RT and 2nd edition were quite robust and open ended when it came to adding and inventing your own stuff.

Smarteye wrote:Down the road, not across the street.
A painless alternative would be to add ammonia to bleach in a confined space listening to sad songs and reading a C.S. Goto novel.
 
   
Made in us
Speed Drybrushing






Chicago, Illinois

SmackCakes wrote:You could probably just play RT as is. Unlike newer versions of 40k, RT and 2nd edition were quite robust and open ended when it came to adding and inventing your own stuff.


I think the biggest issue is FINDING a copy of RT. There are only a couple that I saw on eBay, but it's not exactly easy to find a copy these days. If GW reprinted RT as a collectible (as WOTC has done with D&D 1E occasionally), I'd be all over it, but I seriously doubt that'll occur.

Rokugnar Eldar (6500) - Wolves of Excess (2000) - Marines Diagnostica (2200)
tumblr - I paint on Twitch! - Also a Level 2 Magic Judge  
   
Made in us
Cowboy Wannabe




Sacramento

Magc8ball is correct, finding out of print copies of rules is difficult (particularly in the US, where there are fewer copies to chase).

Having a "retro" version of a ruleset in print means that anyone can buy or download it, and play, and new unit rules can be writen to match a ruleset which people can actually get and read.

   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





Thing is, nostalgia is nice and all but gaming has come a long way. I’m not saying that newer versions of games are inherently superior, but standards have increased since the industry first started.

I think in D&D and 40K the earlier versions of the games have a lot to offer over their modern counterparts, but there is no denying they were extremely rough products. This is not the fault of the designers, it is through their early publishing efforts that we built the standards we now take for granted.

I love Rogue Trader, and it really is a blast to play, but it reads and works like a first draft and it could really, really do with a re-write. D&D 2nd ed (I never played 1st) is even worse, there are no design goals at all, the whole thing reads like a stream of consciousness with incredible levels of detail on the most trivial elements, and almost no detail given to elements one would think extremely important.

I think that’s what the OP is talking about, yeah? Returning to the ideas and design goals of those early games, and keeping the core of the games, but just cleaning them up to make them more accessible?

“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Tilter at Windmills






Manchester, NH

I think it's feasible.

Almost all of the D&D retroclones (Labyrinth Lord, Swords & Wizardry, BFRPG, etc.) do some re-writing/tweaking of the actual rules, rather than just reproducing the exact original rules with clearer rules & organization. OSRIC is pretty much the only exception I can think of, and I think it even has a couple of minor edits. So don't feel like you have to stick to the exact original rules.

Under US copyright law, at least, game rules can't be copyrighted, as I understand it. Though the particular idiosyncratic expression thereof can be as a work of art.

If you wanted to reproduce the RT rules, but re-phrasing them to be a bit clearer and better organized, you should be able to do that. GW can be very strict with their IP, but if you avoided using their copyrighted names you may be all right.

I think the bigger issue would be the audience; are there a lot of people out there wanting RT's level of detail and randomness? Or would you be better off just using something like Aetherverse?


Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More 2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++
A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments
The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.

Maelstrom's Edge! 
   
Made in us
Speed Drybrushing






Chicago, Illinois

sebster wrote:I think that’s what the OP is talking about, yeah? Returning to the ideas and design goals of those early games, and keeping the core of the games, but just cleaning them up to make them more accessible?


That's my impression of it, at least. I never actually played RT, but your idea of it is the same that I've gotten of it from talking to people about it: really rough. Unfortunately (at least as far as this discussion is concerned) when they started revising 40k towards the later editions, the rules were made simpler, with more focus on larger armies. While this has made for a (theoretically) tighter, more concise game that can be played to completion in a 2-hour time slot, it's lost a bit of the character. Of course, taking the game in that direction has made GW a ton of money, so it's obviously worked out for them and (honestly) for the community as a whole because 40K getting huge kind of laid the groundwork for the niche that is wargaming to be somewhat larger than it would be otherwise.

In my opinion, though, there is room for games that are somewhat less precise, and bridge the gaps between pure RPG and the wargame that is 40k (or others in the same vein, such as Warmachine et al). It's obviously not a market that GW would want any business with, as it would dilute their efforts and their market. While they've taken stabs at it with Inquisitor (and occasionally reprinting Necromunda). I personally would love a game that allows for such diverse modeling efforts as Rogue Trader (it's part of why I wrote AV), and I have no problems spending an afternoon playing just a couple long games. Something very much like RT would be great to have in that "pure hobby" sense. I think that the efforts towards =I=munda here on the forums have illustrated the desire for something like that in the general gaming population.

So, something very much like a cleaned-up and well-written RT, that's centered more on the relaxed side of the hobby rather than the much more competition-centered world of 40k would be very welcome. There's no way it would SELL well, or become immensely popular on the level of 40k, but mildly supported on the level of the Specialist Games would be awesome. It's not like they'd need to produce a line of miniatures for it.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2010/11/23 06:08:55


Rokugnar Eldar (6500) - Wolves of Excess (2000) - Marines Diagnostica (2200)
tumblr - I paint on Twitch! - Also a Level 2 Magic Judge  
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Tilter at Windmills






Manchester, NH

As you say, RT was not a competitive game. It really assumed cooperation towards a narrative, or the use of a third party referee.

Another historical note: Even in 2nd edition, a 1500pt army was often ~two squads, a character, and a tank or two. People collected more models than that, though, and wanted to play with them. Games of 2000 and 3000 points were very common, despite how long they took. When GW made 3rd edition they simplified the rules and reduced the points values to allow you to get the same number of models on the table in 1500pts as your 2nd ed 3k game, but playing as fast or faster than the 1500pt 2nd ed game.

Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More 2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++
A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments
The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.

Maelstrom's Edge! 
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





Magc8Ball wrote:That's my impression of it, at least. I never actually played RT, but your idea of it is the same that I've gotten of it from talking to people about it: really rough.


Yeah, it's rough. There's a whole lot of stuff that requires gentleman's agreements to work properly. The game outright says that the points values are just suggestive, and cannot account for the full range of possible gear combinations, so common sense was required for building different forces.

Unfortunately (at least as far as this discussion is concerned) when they started revising 40k towards the later editions, the rules were made simpler, with more focus on larger armies.


Yeah, I don't think this is about the quality of the GW rule sets, as no edition has ever been all that great, but they've all been fun anyway. It's more about the basic fact that you can't have the depth and character of a small unit count game, and the scale of a large unit game, unless you're willing to let the average play time blow out wildly, to the point where the game becomes unplayable.

40K used to be a skirmish game, now it's a company level game. Which is great for folk keen to play company level sci-fi games, and not so great for folk looking to play skirmish sci-fi games. A fan made re-write of Rogue Trader could fill that gap.

“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: