Finding a Match

I think there are 200 of you out there somewhere.

Josh thinks there are more. 

He may be right, but I think that there are perhaps 200 people on this particular planet for whom Olde School Wizardry will strike just the right notes and who will find it first droll, then a source of quiet delight, and finally something that triggers a bubbling of creative rambunctiousness.

I don't know.  Olde School Wizardry is a role playing game that uses the GM's fevered (and caffeine fueled) brain as the engine for running the system, not an exhaustive (and exhausting, and ultimately futile) attempt to codify everything a character might attempt to do.  

I think that will narrow the appeal quite a bit.  

There are no "builds".  There is an utter lack of "optimization"--in fact the old fashioned ("olde fangled?") insistence on random rolls during character generation actively keeps that from being an option!

There's a certain glee that some folks find in exploring ineptitude rather than in power fantasy ... and characters in Olde School Wizardry are inept by design.

I think that will appeal to fans of Paranoia far more than fans of Pathfinder.

Also, to run this game well, the GM needs to be able to decide things quickly and with confidence.  That's not to say that she needs to be rigid or dictatorial ... outcomes can certainly be negotiated ... but when a player character Conjures "a defensive goose", she'll need to work out on the spot whether the goose conveys magical or mundane protection, if the goose will protect the caster or a certain area, and whether the goose takes action to defend itself or is merely on its guard against perceived slights.

She'll need to make these decisions without recourse to the rule book, nor can players hope to appeal to the text to arbitrate should their hopes not be met.  

That "rules light, rulings heavy" approach will further narrow the appeal.  If you don't trust your GM, her emotional maturity, and her ability to balance the thrill of victory and the potential for dismal failure, it's probably not going to work out.

So, my goal isn't broad appeal; it's to reach the right people for whom this goofy game will spark some joy.

It's for folks who love the shenanigans and pratfalls of the late Jim Holloway's art more than the polished flex of Jeff Easley's work.

It's for the crowd that got more excited by West End Games title Ghostbusters: A Frightfully Cheerful Roleplaying Game than for their excellent Star Wars: The Roleplaying Game.

It's for people who love the amateur art and production of the Holmes Basic Set and The Thieves of Fortress Badabaskor more than the polish or beauty of Waterdeep: Dragon Heist and Legend of Five Rings.

I don't know how many of you fit that description.  Maybe 200?  Maybe more?  I honestly don't know.  The creative market is delightfully crowded and self-publishing lets more crackpots like me get their ideas out into the wide world, but I'm not in a hurry, and these things have a way of working out.