Does the term "OSR" just mean "D&D?

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Yeah, that maps well to how I remember it from playing WFRP. But the system we used was pretty similar to that - certainly there were crit hits, and damage was calculated likewise. I seem to remember there was a parry roll, too, but it was over a decade ago* so I might be mixing it up with another d100 system

Yeah, a defender can attempt to parry a roll if they have an Attack left and an appropriate weapon - it's a D100 roll against their own WS, success reducing Damage by D6.

So let me repeat the question, this time with emphasis: what are the advantages of WFRP1e over 2e? From the description, the combat system was pretty much the same - which maps well to what the WFRP hands had explained to me, too. From what I gathered the magic system was a bigger** difference!

I don't personally know 2e at all. I only know reviewing Zweihander it had overcomplicated the whole thing quite a bit, and was told the game was based on 2e not 1e, so I can't say how well it reflected 2e vs how much it was just Fox f---in' the whole thing up with a bunch of extra rules and dice pools.
 
Why on earth would anyone want to claim to be part of something no three people agree on the boundaries of?

All that does is allow others to define you however they wish, irrespective of how you define yourself

Now, show me something that is tightly defined to the point where there’s general agreement of what a name means, what it’s trying to do, and what people who claim a part in it are generally about - that is something I would consider whether it applied to me or not, and claim it if it applied

like "B.O.O.B.Z."?
 
I think about this a lot. With the growing number of non-D&D retro-clones out now, is the OSR expanding, in a meaningful way, beyond its D&D roots? Does it need to?

D&D's popularity has waxed and waned over the years. And while the current amount enthusiasm and visibility it has garnered is nice, it remains to be seen how long it will last.

Would it be good for the hobby as a whole to be de-coupled from D&D, at least to the extent that awareness of different games, systems and concepts becomes more well known? How long can a hobby continue to enjoy popularity that is largely focused on a single game?

Gamers have been discovering (or re-discovering) the joys of other games for years now, and cloning or adapting them. But, can these other systems gain significant traction? And if they can, what does that mean for the OSR, and for gaming in general?
While the OSR certainly seems to have begun as an attempt to resurrect earlier editions of D&D (a can of worms, because really, what's the cutoff), I think the logical next step was to resurrect other early systems; for weren't these old-school as well? That said, I've published titles that sought to deliberately recreate the look and feel of early, amateur-era games (primitive production, war-gamey rules, etc.) and marketed them to the OSR because I knew they would be of interest to that crowd. I'm talking Pits & Perils, a spiritual (not literal) clone and Barons of Braunstein with David Wesely. Were these OSR? Yes, inasmuch as they were an attempt to resurrect elements exclusive to the early scene. But I think there's a point where the OSR just sort of spills back into the general hobby, if that helps. Is the OSR just D&D? It shouldn't have to be. Is the OSR still a meaningful distinction? For marketing, probably.
 
This would have required a level of agreement and control that was never there nor ever desired. The fact the OSR is a muddled confusing mess of the terms is the same reason why the output of the group of folks publishing, promoting, and publishing for the classic editions is a muddled confusing mess. Freedom to what one wants with the material in the form they see best.
It has nothing to do with open gaming, or freedom any of that. Some day perhaps my posts won't be a proxy for beating a horse I'm not trotting to the race.

Big tents. Big tents using open licensing. Big tents using closed licensing. Big tents using muppets to dance the tango. It really doesn't matter. Big tents are where everything that has momentum and impact goes to die a syrupy, dumbed down, incoherent mess. This has nothing to do with freedom to publish their hearts desire. In anything, as soon as you see a bunch of people who agree on nothing else calling themselves the same name...it's time to get the check and go.
 
Small tents - exclusive narrow factions that expend so much energy on defining their boundaries and denouncing traitors from the one true way that they leave no room for cross genre creativity and fertilization of ideas.
 
While the OSR certainly seems to have begun as an attempt to resurrect earlier editions of D&D (a can of worms, because really, what's the cutoff), I think the logical next step was to resurrect other early systems; for weren't these old-school as well? That said, I've published titles that sought to deliberately recreate the look and feel of early, amateur-era games (primitive production, war-gamey rules, etc.) and marketed them to the OSR because I knew they would be of interest to that crowd. I'm talking Pits & Perils, a spiritual (not literal) clone and Barons of Braunstein with David Wesely. Were these OSR? Yes, inasmuch as they were an attempt to resurrect elements exclusive to the early scene. But I think there's a point where the OSR just sort of spills back into the general hobby, if that helps. Is the OSR just D&D? It shouldn't have to be. Is the OSR still a meaningful distinction? For marketing, probably.
OK, now at least I know why your games have that distinct look:grin:!

Also, welcome to the Pub:thumbsup:!
 
I don't personally know 2e at all. I only know reviewing Zweihander it had overcomplicated the whole thing quite a bit, and was told the game was based on 2e not 1e, so I can't say how well it reflected 2e vs how much it was just Fox f---in' the whole thing up with a bunch of extra rules and dice pools.

Having played and enjoyed both WHFRP 1e and 2e, then playing Zweihander, yeah... our group felt like Fox had just added a bunch of stuff. It's been a while, but my recollection is that 2e kinda streamlined/standardized some things... it felt a bit more a regular RPG and the war gaming roots weren't as obvious. Then Fox added 433 more pages of his own fiddliness on top of that, resulting in a near 700 pages brick of overcomplication that did not earn its page count, IMO.
 
Having played and enjoyed both WHFRP 1e and 2e, then playing Zweihander, yeah... our group felt like Fox had just added a bunch of stuff. It's been a while, but my recollection is that 2e kinda streamlined/standardized some things... it felt a bit more a regular RPG and the war gaming roots weren't as obvious. Then Fox added 433 more pages of his own fiddliness on top of that, resulting in a near 700 pages brick of overcomplication that did not earn its page count, IMO.
Yeah, I think Zweihander isn't really a retroclone. It's 2e, plus a massive load of house rules. And that's made even more noticable by Fox's tendency to overwrite everything.
 
It has nothing to do with open gaming, or freedom any of that. Some day perhaps my posts won't be a proxy for beating a horse I'm not trotting to the race.

Big tents. Big tents using open licensing. Big tents using closed licensing. Big tents using muppets to dance the tango. It really doesn't matter. Big tents are where everything that has momentum and impact goes to die a syrupy, dumbed down, incoherent mess. This has nothing to do with freedom to publish their hearts desire. In anything, as soon as you see a bunch of people who agree on nothing else calling themselves the same name...it's time to get the check and go.
You know why I respond? Because of the despair that underlies everything above and other similar responses. What I want is more stuff out there whether it is commercial or just shared that targets AD&D 'as is' and Gygaxian D&D. What I want is what T T. Foster wants, to see more new stuff that feels like it could have been released in the 80s? Along with anything else that related. All of this needs and deserves to be played and supported. However imperfectly I argue or debate, this the bottom line as far as I am concerned.


It has nothing to do with open gaming, or freedom any of that. Some day perhaps my posts won't be a proxy for beating a horse I'm not trotting to the race.
It the source of what you are complaining about, the syrupy, dumbed down, incoherent mess that OSR represents to you. It is on point. The mess is not caused by commercial greed, not just caused by posers trying to eclipse Gygax or Arneson, it caused by hundreds all being able to march to the tune of their own drummers.

Given how OSRIC and Basic Fantasy was developed, did anybody seriously expect something different to happen?
 
I read Zweihander and was way less impressed that I thought I would be based on some of the opinions Ive read of it.

 
There’s two versions of Zweihander every reviewer should know about: the cut edition and the uncut edition.
 
You mean like Unearthed Arcana? Splat books are old school it seems :smile:
CHA4008-CoP1-cover-700__68460.1518312535.jpg


This is the oldest splat book I own.
 
I read Zweihander and was way less impressed that I thought I would be based on some of the opinions Ive read of it.
Yeah, while I have issues with it to the point of hoping for a revised version, WFRP 4e come much closer to getting some of what I wanted to see right. To be fair to Fox, he's said outright that Zweihander is not as good for playing Warhammer as Warhammer is. There's just not much left after that which I think Zweihander has to offer me.
 
You know why I respond? Because of the despair that underlies everything above and other similar responses. What I want is more stuff out there whether it is commercial or just shared that targets AD&D 'as is' and Gygaxian D&D. What I want is what T T. Foster wants, to see more new stuff that feels like it could have been released in the 80s? Along with anything else that related. All of this needs and deserves to be played and supported. However imperfectly I argue or debate, this the bottom line as far as I am concerned.
Only speaking for myself, but despite the fact my natural state is that of the cynic, I'm feeling anything but the opposite of despair currently.

The RPG market has more to offer me than it has done for years. I'm even back to following the new release schedule of several companies and I haven't done that since Unknown Armies.

On top of that, I have three creative projects on the drawing board, the first of which is going to be started in earnest when my partner in crime gets all her Masters degree stuff in. And you might like to know that on the most suitable of those three projects I've been partially inspired by some of your arguments and have made the decision to release it as open content.
 
There. FTFY.
You've been living in 'Murica for too long.
If I wanted to go full American, I'd just refer to everyone from the UK as English.

On a related note, I was out somewhere with my parents last week.

AMERICAN SPEAKING TO MY FATHER: Wow! That's quite the English accent you have there. Where'd you pick that up?

MY FATHER: Australia.
 
Only speaking for myself, but despite the fact my natural state is that of the cynic, I'm feeling anything but the opposite of despair currently.

The RPG market has more to offer me than it has done for years. I'm even back to following the new release schedule of several companies and I haven't done that since Unknown Armies.
The last few years have been good for my interests as well. Adventures in Middle Earth and to a lesser extent The One Ring have been a welcome addition to my library. While I don't use ACKS as a system, I do use or adapt extremely useful sections of it. So I keep up with their releases. Several old standbys like GURPS, Harn and Harnmaster have had new life breathed into them in recent years.
On top of that, I have three creative projects on the drawing board, the first of which is going to be started in earnest when my partner in crime gets all her Masters degree stuff in. And you might like to know that on the most suitable of those three projects I've been partially inspired by some of your arguments and have made the decision to release it as open content.
Appreciate you letting me know that and hope the project work out well. And especially releasing open content as part of it.

One thing I don't often touch on about open content is that it can be an effective form of advertisement. Not because it will spread far and wide. But because you can say "Oh well if you want to look at it for yourself, just download this SRD." Which is very helpful in a non intrusive way for people to decide to buy.
 
CHA4008-CoP1-cover-700__68460.1518312535.jpg


This is the oldest splat book I own.
Mine too I think.

It's essential if you play Gloranthan set Runequest of that era IMO; especially for that all important second write up of Kyger Litor :smile:

But not important, except as an example of how to do cults for non Gloranthan RQ.

Runequest differed from AD&D in having only one core rule book.
 
Mine too I think.

It's essential if you play Gloranthan set Runequest of that era IMO; especially for that all important second write up of Kyger Litor :smile:

But not important, except as an example of how to do cults for non Gloranthan RQ.

Runequest differed from AD&D in having only one core rule book.
Oh, and if you don't consider Greyhawk a splat book, Traveller Book 4 - Mercenary is 1978 as is Supplement 1 - 1001 Characters. The Chivalry and Sorcery Sourcebook is also 1978. Monsters Monsters is 1976. Arduin Grimoire 1977 (if we count 3rd party supplements). Other than War of Wizzards (1974) the earliest Tekumel supplement is Legions of the Petal Throne in 1977.

Oh, and a little comment on Cults of Prax, if you play RQ1, you need Cults of Prax to really get an idea of cults, the RQ1 cult descriptions are much more limited.
 
Oh, and if you don't consider Greyhawk a splat book, Traveller Book 4 - Mercenary is 1978 as is Supplement 1 - 1001 Characters. The Chivalry and Sorcery Sourcebook is also 1978. Monsters Monsters is 1976. Arduin Grimoire 1977 (if we count 3rd party supplements). Other than War of Wizzards (1974) the earliest Tekumel supplement is Legions of the Petal Throne in 1977.

Oh, and a little comment on Cults of Prax, if you play RQ1, you need Cults of Prax to really get an idea of cults, the RQ1 cult descriptions are much more limited.
In defence of Monsters!Monsters! non splat status, it's playable without T&T.
 
In defence of Monsters!Monsters! non splat status, it's playable without T&T.
Fair enough. I think C&S Sourcebook is the best candidate for a raw splatbook as opposed to "advanced rules" which Greyhawk might fall under with the new character options being a small part of the supplement. It depends on what the definition of splatbook is beyond offering additional character options.
 
... It depends on what the definition of splatbook is beyond offering additional character options.
I define it as offering additional or new options for a specific area that far outweigh previous options and other areas (e.g. classes), it must have power creep in my view. So Greyhawk maybe, Book 4 Mercenary and Book 5 High Guard certainly until Scouts, Merchants, Nobles, etc. got their own expansion.

I consider classes (additional character options) proliferating faster than rabbits to be a whole other thing :smile:
 
You know why I respond? Because of the despair that underlies everything above and other similar responses. What I want is more stuff out there whether it is commercial or just shared that targets AD&D 'as is' and Gygaxian D&D. What I want is what T T. Foster wants, to see more new stuff that feels like it could have been released in the 80s? Along with anything else that related. All of this needs and deserves to be played and supported. However imperfectly I argue or debate, this the bottom line as far as I am concerned.



It the source of what you are complaining about, the syrupy, dumbed down, incoherent mess that OSR represents to you. It is on point. The mess is not caused by commercial greed, not just caused by posers trying to eclipse Gygax or Arneson, it caused by hundreds all being able to march to the tune of their own drummers.

Given how OSRIC and Basic Fantasy was developed, did anybody seriously expect something different to happen?

There's no despair in my post Rob. It's an observation that applies generally to all tents/causes/movements, and an accurate observation; the OSR did not escape the dynamic. But it's not despairing of anything. If you'd have asked me if I had any despair about how the OSR developed, I could have told you "no". As you mention, it is the simple outcome of "hundreds all being able to march to the tune of their own drummers". Now, how does that work when hundreds are all going in different directions?

Again, I suspect that my posts have, to you, become some sort of proxy for arguments you had with other people in 2007/8. And you're arguing against a ghost.
 
It's an observation that applies generally to all tents/causes/movements, and an accurate observation; the OSR did not escape the dynamic.

I disagree and explain why further in this response.

There's no despair in my post Rob. It's an observation that applies generally to all tents/causes/movements, and an accurate observation; the OSR did not escape the dynamic.

I guess we have to disagree because of statements like below

Big tents are where everything that has momentum and impact goes to die a syrupy, dumbed down, incoherent mess.


But it's not despairing of anything. If you'd have asked me if I had any despair about how the OSR developed, I could have told you "no". As you mention, it is the simple outcome of "hundreds all being able to march to the tune of their own drummers". Now, how does that work when hundreds are all going in different directions?
Because the classic editions are there to be returned too or picked up by somebody new to use. That what grounds things. Regardless of changes in society and circumstance the games remain to be picked up and played.

Again, I suspect that my posts have, to you, become some sort of proxy for arguments you had with other people in 2007/8. And you're arguing against a ghost.
You made a public post on a public forum making specific points. A response is part of the risk when one does that. It feels like a 2008 issue it because it existing issue that still existed in 2008 and still exists today. I disagree then and I still disagree today that the mess resulting from everybody going in their own direction resulted in something that is syrupy, dumbed down and/or incoherent.
 
Yeah, I think the result is a vibrant and rich gaming culture. Are there more games involved than I'll ever play? Sure, but that's a feature, not a bug. Since even OSR-adjacent stuff (that's my bag) is easily compatible with a minimum of faffing, I get use out of anything that looks good. I own modules and settings from pretty much every major OSR publisher, and a ton of smaller ones, and I use 'em all, with very little thought given to which rulebook I'll be using. Mostly I can convert them on the fly with no issue, although that isn't how I'd plan to run a whole game. Some people mutter about the sometimes small variances between ruleset A and B, but even that doesn't bother me. I generally know exactly what kind of game experience I'm looking for, and I'm quite happy to bolt widgets onto (or off of) whatever rules I happen to be using in that game, whether it's Labyrinth Lord, original B/X, or my own bastard Black Hack variant.

I find the creativity and breadth of the current OSR scene to be an immense source of inspiration for my games.
 
You made a public post on a public forum making specific points. A response is part of the risk when one does that. It feels like a 2008 issue it because it existing issue that still existed in 2008 and still exists today. I disagree then and I still disagree today that the mess resulting from everybody going in their own direction resulted in something that is syrupy, dumbed down and/or incoherent.
Poison, Warrant, Skid Row, and E'Nuff Z'Nuff are the same as AC/DC, Judas Priest, and Iron Maiden because they are all filed under "metal" in a 1989 record store's categorization system, and no one can point out that this is incoherent, or that the former bands are syrupy garbage, because they're all taking advantage of laws allowing each band to cover whatever material it chooses to in its albums.

If someone makes this observation then clearly they are full of despair, or implying that Poison, Warrant, Skid Row, and E'Nuff Z'Nuff should have to get approval for the songs they cover from some outside authority, because I had an argument with someone else 12 years ago based on a loosely similar premise.
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top