Known Retro Clones, and the Games they Duplicate

[turkishproverb]

This is a list of retro-clones of OOP games I've found. I find them an intersting commodety, and have thus been collecting links.

Pathfinder, D&D 3.5
Swords and Wizardry Whitebox: White Box D&D
Dark Dungeons: Rules Cyclopedia
Labyrinth Lord+Advanced Book: AD&D 1.0
Swords and Wizardry: Red Box/OD&D Basic?
Mutant Future: Gamma World
Labyrinth Lord alone: Basic OD&D?
OSRIC: AD&D 1E
For Gold and Glory:AD&D 2E
ZeFRS: Debranded Remake of Conan RPG
GORE: RQ? Seems a bit off from reports
4C: TSR MARVEL
Legends of the Ancient world: Fantasy Trip
Openquest: RQ


Supposedly there was a remake of the old James Bond RPG, but I can't find it.


Basic Fantasy didn't seem to quite fit any.

Neither Did Castles and Crusades, or any of the various different release Microlights.


Did I miss any retro-clones?

[TroubleBrewing]

Wow, I've been looking for a game exactly like ZeFRS forEVER. Thank you so much for posting that link!

[Talyn]

Castles and Crusades is, as far as I can tell, not a retro-clone, but is instead an evolution of AD&D 2E, taking it in a very different direction than 3E.

[B!shop]

Pathfinder, as far as I know, is not a D&D 3.5 clone, but an evolution of it (and IMO a better evolution than D&D4).

[hamlet]

Castles and Crusades is, as far as I can tell, not a retro-clone, but is instead an evolution of AD&D 2E, taking it in a very different direction than 3E.

Actually, it's more an evolution of AD&D 1ed. It's closer in thematics and aesthetic to that than 2nd edition.

Labyrinth Lord is actually closer to Red Box and Swords and Wizrdry is probably closer to a cleaned up Little Brown Books and the Supplements I-IV. Kind of. They both go after essentially the same point in D&D history, but come at it from different angles, one from the point of view of a cleaned up original and expanded, and the other from a stripped down and cleaned up version of the future harkening backward. LL is MUCH closer to Red Box than S&W is anyway.

[LibraryOgre]

Pathfinder is not a retro-clone. It's explicitly part of the d20 SRD, to allow people to play d20 SRD. While there are a number of changes from base d20, that just makes it a different game from d20, not a retro-clone... the changes don't make it more like d20, but less.

OSRIC is a retro-clone in that it uses the d20 SRD and OGL to reconstruct something approximating 1e AD&D. That makes it a retro-clone.

[turkishproverb]

...

I'm not going to argue Pathfinder's status as a clone with you guys. If you disagree, fine. You might be right.

[erikun]

Perhaps "revisions" or "similar systems" would get the message across better.

[turkishproverb]

Perhaps "revisions" or "similar systems" would get the message across better.

True. The problem is, even something like OSRIC isn't an EXACT replica. Rather it's just extremely close. I'm honestly not sure where to draw the line. Pathfinder is right on the edge there.

[Tyndmyr]

Im cool with it. It's not just intended to be a clone, of course, but there is a similarity there.

Likewise, I'd be comfortable listing C&C as a 2e clone. This is also not perfectly accurate, but it gets the general idea across.

[turkishproverb]

True. I didn't count it as such because I thought it moved further away from 2E or 1E than Pathfinder did from 3.X.

Mainly, I'm just trying to catalogue retro-clones.

[Simple Man]

Pathfinder, D&D 3.5
Swords and Wizardry Whitebox: White Box D&D/OD&D
Dark Dungeons: Rules Cyclopedia
Labyrinth Lord + Advanced Edition Companion: AD&D
Swords and Wizardry: OD&D + Supplement 1 (Greyhawk)
Labyrinth Lord alone: B/X D&D
OSRIC: AD&D 1E
For Gold and Glory:AD&D 2E
ZeFRS: Debranded Remake of Conan RPG
GORE: Call of Cthulhu BRP
4C: TSR MARVEL
Legends of the Ancient world: Fantasy Trip
Openquest: RQ2

Fixed your list. Mutant Future is a "What if Gamma World were based on B/X", not a retroclone of any given edition. Pathfinder is despite people claiming the contrary for no real purpose.

Pathfinder is not a retro-clone. It's explicitly part of the d20 SRD, to allow people to play d20 SRD. While there are a number of changes from base d20, that just makes it a different game from d20, not a retro-clone... the changes don't make it more like d20, but less.

OSRIC is a retro-clone in that it uses the d20 SRD and OGL to reconstruct something approximating 1e AD&D. That makes it a retro-clone.

Pathfinder is a retro-clone in that it used the d20 SRD and OGL to reconstruct something approximating D&D 3.X. That makes it a retro-clone.

All retroclones have mechanical changes from their dead D&D counterparts in order to avoid copyright infringement (Most of these seem as good ideas for houserules, like S&W's support of ascending armor class or Pathfinder's "no dead levels" take on 3.X). All are designed to be compatible with their dead counterparts as well.

I have yet to figure out why "retroclone" is a curse word to Pathfinder players. It's like you equate "retroclone" with "crappy".

[Totally Guy]

There's a game called Tombs and Terrors that you've missed. It's free too.

Seems like a retroclone of Dungeons and Dragons. Part 3rd edition, part older.

Edit: The review says it's not a retroclone...

[Simple Man]

There's a game called Tombs and Terrors that you've missed. It's free too.

Seems like a retroclone of Dungeons and Dragons. Part 3rd edition, part older.

Edit: The review says it's not a retroclone...

It's not a retroclone. Being old school does not mean being a retroclone. Retroclones attempt to closely mimic OOP, no longer supported versions of games in effort to bring a version back into print and have support rolling out again.

That's why Pathfinder is a retroclone while Tombs and Terrors (and the other Washbourne D&Ds), Lamentations of the Flame Princess, Mutant Future, Adventures Dark and Deep, Castles & Crusades, and Stars Without Number aren't.

Personally I have no idea as to the retroclone status of Basic Fantasy. I'm not sure it's specifically aimed at recreating a specific old version of D&D and not merely it's own old school game based on the 3.X SRD (like Castles & Crusades)

[LibraryOgre]

I have yet to figure out why "retroclone" is a curse word to Pathfinder players. It's like you equate "retroclone" with "crappy".

Actually, I'm not a Pathfinder player. I equate "retro-clone" with something being reasonably retro, not "published contemporaneously for several months".

[turkishproverb]

A fair interpretation, even if one I don't exactly share.

[Tvtyrant]

We could just widen it to "retro-games" and then we wouldn't have to deal with "clones" as a pejorative.

[turkishproverb]

Yea, but the "clones" part isn't what's the problem in definition.

Hackmaster BASIC is a proud retro-style game, but it's not a duplicate of an old one. Same with Castles and Crusades.