Lands of Adventure: A Gold-Box Inspired CRPG

[ProphetSword]

At one point, I had smooth movement going (similar to The Legend of Grimrock). However, I couldn't get the rotation to work the way that I wanted, and I wasn't sure it would do the collision detection accurately. I went with something a little more simple and figured I would address it later.

Also, does anyone know what it would require to use the OGL in a video game? I tried it once, but trying to follow exactly what I had to do in order to not break the license turned out to be a nightmare. I know other people have done it (like Knights of the Chalice), so if anyone can help me determine what can and cannot be done with it, I would be appreciative. Using the OGL would make this game even more Gold-Box like in nature.

 

[V_K]

You should probably make the step size somewhat bigger, maybe twice as big. Movement in the video feels to me a bit more like Krondor than Goldbox.

 

[Alchemist]

Also, does anyone know what it would require to use the OGL in a video game? I tried it once, but trying to follow exactly what I had to do in order to not break the license turned out to be a nightmare. I know other people have done it (like Knights of the Chalice), so if anyone can help me determine what can and cannot be done with it, I would be appreciative. Using the OGL would make this game even more Gold-Box like in nature.

I have given this a fair amount of research since I'm planning to use the OGL in my game as well. Here's the breakdown of what I know:

• You can use all of the rules in the d20 SRD and add to it / alter it however you want. You could use it to reverse engineer older editions of D&D / AD&D like what is done in the OSR tabletop scene. So theoretically you could make a retro clone of 2nd Edition AD&D with it.
• Provide all of the OGL rules your game uses in some kind of human-readable format. Knights of the Chalice does this through the in-game help system I believe. Every rule your game uses needs to be spelled out, even ones you alter or add to the base OGL SRD. I suppose you could also just include an HTML or PDF file which spells out all the rules of your game. But the in-game help system is a nice elegant way of keeping everything together.
• Anything you add to the OGL base rules can optionally be designated as "Open Content" - and if this is the case you need to specify somewhere in your OGL statement what parts are Open Content. I think all of the rules based on WotC's rules SRD need to continue being Open Content by default.
• Your OGL statement will also need to designate Product Identity - things which you are not releasing as Open Content. In the PnP world this is usually setting info, fluff, character names, stuff like that.
• You can't use any of WotC's Product Identity in your game. This is stuff like Forgotten Realms setting info, iconic monster names like the Beholder and Mind Flayer, etc. This is no big deal because most likely you'll be making your own setting anyway.
• In additional to the rules you need to provide the OGL statement in your game - which is basically the standard OGL statement with any additions you make designating Open Content and Product Identity. I would take a look at Knights of the Chalice's OGL statement or maybe OSR PnP D&D clones to see how this is typically handled. It doesn't have to be horribly complex - you could just say all your rules are open content, and proper names are Product Identity - something like that.

The Software FAQ on the WotC site covers this pretty much: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123i

There is a bit of confusion caused by the fact the d20 License is yet another license that existed when the OGL was made. The d20 license is defunct and no longer available to use. It's a more restrictive license they had which publishers could use to closely tie their products with the official D&D system. That's why the FAQ says you can't make a d20 License game without WotC's permission. Any reference to that in the FAQ should be ignored, since it doesn't exist anymore and there is now only the OGL (which they specifically say you can make a game from). A lot of people seem to think the d20 License and the OGL are the same thing, and this is false.

 

[ProphetSword]

I'm starting to remember why I ditched the idea of using the OGL in the first place. The "human readable" format issue, and the fact that there are certain preconceptions about spells and monsters and such. I think I'll stick with my homebrew RPG system, which is probably a lot simpler than the OGL rules anyway.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

I'm starting to remember why I ditched the idea of using the OGL in the first place. The "human readable" format issue, and the fact that there are certain preconceptions about spells and monsters and such. I think I'll stick with my homebrew RPG system, which is probably a lot simpler than the OGL rules anyway.

I'd rather use homebrew rules than spend time adapting someone's ruleset.
Especially if you're trying to make sure that your game stands out and has some unique ideas.

 

[Alchemist]

I'm starting to remember why I ditched the idea of using the OGL in the first place. The "human readable" format issue, and the fact that there are certain preconceptions about spells and monsters and such. I think I'll stick with my homebrew RPG system, which is probably a lot simpler than the OGL rules anyway.

Well you can customize it however you want - nothing says you have to use any of the standard D&D monsters or spells. Or even the Vancian spell system. If complexity is an issue, check out some of the numerous OSR retro-clones out there - a lot of them really strip it down and make it simpler and more akin to old editions, removing feats and skills, etc. You can also see on that list the wide variety of forms people have utilized the OGL for - using it for very different settings and even sci-fi games.

As for the human-readable issue - I guess that is a bit of hassle but I don't see it as that much work. Start with a cut-and-paste of the SRD text and just add / remove your tweaks on top of that.

I can see the benefits of homebrewing your own system though. No need to follow legalise and you can still "borrow" game mechanics from D&D as long as you change the terminology, since game mechanics can't be copyrighted.

 

[ProphetSword]

I can see the benefits of homebrewing your own system though. No need to follow legalise and you can still "borrow" game mechanics from D&D as long as you change the terminology, since game mechanics can't be copyrighted.

Right. Which is kind of what I'm doing. But, also, if it's a D&D-like system instead of actual D&D, then I don't have to adhere to the spell lists or how certain rules work (so, if I want to develop my own rules on how traps are disarmed, there's not a preconceived notion of how it should work...because it isn't really D&D).

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

I can see the benefits of homebrewing your own system though. No need to follow legalise and you can still "borrow" game mechanics from D&D as long as you change the terminology, since game mechanics can't be copyrighted.

Can't they?
http://www.google.com/patents/US5718632

 

[Alchemist]

Right. Which is kind of what I'm doing. But, also, if it's a D&D-like system instead of actual D&D, then I don't have to adhere to the spell lists or how certain rules work (so, if I want to develop my own rules on how traps are disarmed, there's not a preconceived notion of how it should work...because it isn't really D&D).

What I'm saying is you can still do that if you use OGL rules. Just change the bits you want to change - make your own trap system and add it in. Throw out the D&D spell list and make your own. OSR publishers have been doing that for many years now. Look at Dungeon Crawl Classics as an example. It has some very different game mechanics to D&D, including a very different spell system.

 

[tuluse]

I'm starting to remember why I ditched the idea of using the OGL in the first place. The "human readable" format issue, and the fact that there are certain preconceptions about spells and monsters and such. I think I'll stick with my homebrew RPG system, which is probably a lot simpler than the OGL rules anyway.

I'd rather use homebrew rules than spend time adapting someone's ruleset.
Especially if you're trying to make sure that your game stands out and has some unique ideas.

No offense to anyone, and you should definitely do what you enjoy when making an indie game, but chances are your homebrew is going to be a lot worse than adapting D20. Why do I think this? Years and years of playing cRPGs.

I can see the benefits of homebrewing your own system though. No need to follow legalise and you can still "borrow" game mechanics from D&D as long as you change the terminology, since game mechanics can't be copyrighted.

Can't they?
http://www.google.com/patents/US5718632

If you notice that's not a copyright, he's 100% correct

 

[Alchemist]

I can see the benefits of homebrewing your own system though. No need to follow legalise and you can still "borrow" game mechanics from D&D as long as you change the terminology, since game mechanics can't be copyrighted.

Can't they?
http://www.google.com/patents/US5718632

That looks like a patent for loading system for a game - more of a programming thing. Not actual gameplay rules mechanics.

 

[ProphetSword]

No offense to anyone, and you should definitely do what you enjoy when making an indie game, but chances are your homebrew is going to be a lot worse than adapting D20. Why do I think this? Years and years of playing cRPGs.

Maybe. I don't see why D20 is so much more special than any other similar system I could put to use.

 

[Magellan]

I am giving serious thought to going back to that version.

The more Goldbox-like, the better! (especially now since TSI's game doesn't look much like Goldbox).

 

[tuluse]

Maybe. I don't see why D20 is so much more special than any other similar system I could put to use.

It's not, I just know from experience all custom rulesets are invariably less interesting than good old d&d. It doesn't seem like it would be hard to beat, but it never happens for some reason.

 

[Alchemist]

Advantages I see to using D&D / AD&D / d20 in a CRPG:

• 40+ years of people creating stats, tweaks, and rules for everything imaginable - you can steal these or use them as a starting point for your own designs.
• Depending on which edition you use, it can have a modicum of game balance already built-in. Figuring this out from scratch is no small task, I imagine.
• Almost everyone knows the system - so it's easy for players to jump in
• It's classic, it's D&D!

 

[slowdive]

probably means more discrete like movement like the gold box 3d instead of a smooth continuous of modern 3d engines. Move the camera in 3-5 discrete movements instead of a continuous move from point A to B.

EDIT: whoops, I was a whole page off on this comment, haha...didn't see the 10 there as I was on page 9 still from yesterday.

About rule set, go with whatever allows you to finish the game.

What is better?
1) A totally awesome, super complex, detailed game that never gets done
or
2) A reasonable project scope that isn't necessarily groundbreaking, but is fun and we get to play it

I vote #2 because #1 rarely gets done from my experience (vapourware galore). Scope creep is always a killer, don't get too bogged down in details, just keep moving. Keep it simple and fun, and if it has a good story we'll all be happy :D

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

I'm starting to remember why I ditched the idea of using the OGL in the first place. The "human readable" format issue, and the fact that there are certain preconceptions about spells and monsters and such. I think I'll stick with my homebrew RPG system, which is probably a lot simpler than the OGL rules anyway.

I'd rather use homebrew rules than spend time adapting someone's ruleset.
Especially if you're trying to make sure that your game stands out and has some unique ideas.

No offense to anyone, and you should definitely do what you enjoy when making an indie game, but chances are your homebrew is going to be a lot worse than adapting D20. Why do I think this? Years and years of playing cRPGs.

I can see the benefits of homebrewing your own system though. No need to follow legalise and you can still "borrow" game mechanics from D&D as long as you change the terminology, since game mechanics can't be copyrighted.

Can't they?
http://www.google.com/patents/US5718632

If you notice that's not a copyright, he's 100% correct

None taken.
Yet I still prefer to design the system, and know it by heart, then adapt someone's system and have a 'good' time making everything look consistent.
Yeah, it might be a worse system, but at the same time I would know where I should push it later, like adding more rules for the next game.

 

[V_K]

A good character system in a CRPG is the one that gets the job done. For example, the character system in Quest for Glory series is rather simplistic, but it fits the gameplay. And if Coles used DnD adaptation instead, that would be a total trainwreck - DnD is completely unsuitable for non-combat-focused games.
So the question is what kind of experience you are aiming for. If it will be rather close to the Goldbox (i.e. basically a tactical battle engine with some limited exploration) - then it'd make sense to use OGL. If you want a more diverse gameplay, better go with homebrew, even if it means sacrificing tactical complexity.

 

[ProphetSword]

I've spent the past two weeks rewriting the whole inventory system and getting things working as they should be with equipment and such. I'm pretty happy with the progress overall. The main screen has changed a little, as it now displays a color change whenever a character has been wounded or has lost mana (those numbers will show up yellow). In addition, the main screen also shows the armor rating of each of the characters (much like the Gold-Box games shows the AC on the main screen).

Here's a screenshot in the lowest possible resolution in the game (1024x768):

There's a lot going on in the background that these screenshots can't show. The entire reworking of the inventory system and equipped items. The dabbling that's going on with the combat engine while I decide how to approach it. So, there's a lot of work happening in this project.

Also, does anyone know if there's a way to reduce the size of the screenshots I post here? They're always so damn large. I can size them on my blog, so it's not usually an issue there, but I'd really like to make them smaller here.

 

[Zep Zepo]

That looks good, man! I like the fonts, the colors, everything!

I forget what the big area at the bottom is for, but overall...SWEET!

Zep--

 

[Jaesun]

Yeah I Really like that as well! That looks sweet!

 

[ProphetSword]

It took a couple of tries, but I have the beginnings of a tactical combat engine. At the moment, it's just six player icons running around in an empty field of grass, but at least they can detect each other and don't bump into their party mates. Due to collision detection, I could include the whole "Attack Ally?" option, but I never did figure out why it was included in the Gold-Box games in the first place (except in those rare cases where you wanted to kill an NPC to steal their items), so I'm not sure it's necessary.

Also got most of the way done on a resting system that gives a player back their health and mana at the rate of 1 each per hour that passes. Once per day is harsh.

EDIT:
Here's a screenshot of the combat engine in progress. Ignore the blue space. That's where buttons, character information, options, etc. will go later on. Also, the green grass isn't the best. I just used something I had handy for the test.

This puts me more on track to do a modern-day Gold-Box style game. Maybe this thread should be changed so it says "Gold-Box Inspired" game instead of "Old-School Style."

 

[ProphetSword]

I'm not planning on posting daily updates here or anything like that, but I thought I'd show another screenshot of the combat engine progress. At this point, player icons can move in 8 directions via the number keypad or 4 directions with the arrow keys. Attack animations are in, and just like the Gold-Box games, a character will automatically attack if the program registers a collision between a player icon and a monster icon (you can see that happening in the picture if you look at the female priest, who has swung her mace because she hit a goblin icon). I am planning on putting the buttons off to the side instead of the bottom, especially since the Gold-Box games wasted so much space on the side panel anyway.

So, here you go...

 

[ProphetSword]

Started a YouTube channel specifically to showcase videos about the game in order to get feedback. To start with, I put up a video of the combat engine to show how it is currently working. At the moment, there are no buttons (so player icons are simply running forward and attacking) and the engine doesn't calculate movement based on armor (all PCs have base movement of 6 spaces in the video) or take into account that diagonal movement counts as more than one space. Monsters can detect player characters, but no attack routines have been implemented, so none are shown in the video.

Hopefully this will give you a real Gold-Box feel, and you will get an idea of where I'm going with this:

 

[Alchemist]

Looking good - and very Gold-Boxy!