|
|
Post by jeffb on Jun 20, 2021 10:07:58 GMT -6
I'm too late to the OSR scene to be much help, so I will abstain from voting. However, seeing how popular this thread has become, I took the opportunity to educate myself. This is what I found. Dan Proctor, of Labyrinth Lord fame, wrote on the OSR for his blog, in 2008. Before 5th edition, before G+, before Matt Finch's Old School Primer, Dan Proctor explains the importance of WOTC marketing, the difference between new and old school players, and the future of the OSR. Enjoy!It's interesting to read, but I guess nothing I'd not already known or experienced over all these years. I think the one area that Dan mentions as being a goal of the future, never really came to fruition- that is getting the OSRcclone rulebooks on game shelves. Certainly it happened, but not to the extent in market penetration of physical stores that they were hoping for. They needed a much better and focused effort, and I'd say Goodman Games with DCCRPG was the only really mover and shaker there. Joe built a big community online, with perks for gamers, and store owners to play and run the games at their local establishments. Frog God essentially pushed S&W to the back burner and instead Pathfinder, and then 5E became their focus. BFRPG has remained it's own little niche of a niche, and LL faded away for the most part. The OSR "movement" and "community" has mostly remained an online thing people participate in (while running games at home). It was just as easy for the creative types to create their own OSR game, as it is to produce a adventure or setting book, and they started "hawking their wares" online and creating sub communities and "fandoms". KS has been the real method of distribution for any big print projects, or even small ones0Not the retail mom & pop stores that people like Dan P were wanting to "crack". Because of no central vision, or no one system that carried the day, the OSR became more and more fragmented, in products and attitudes (as we can witness here in this thread). And this is why many people like myself no longer feel invested. It's not a bad thing, or a good thing. It's just a thing. I get the feeling some people in this thread feel that they are being judged on their amount of, or lack of, investment. Not the case. It's just a fun poll, no need to be wringing hands or having an internal struggle about how to vote, folks- it's just a make believe game about elves, dwarves and faeries while rolling dice. No need to take it so seriously. I think waysoftheearth (correct me if I am wrong) and myself were just curious as to how much of the OD&D Proboards community these days is skewed towards OD&D proper (or any TSR era D&D, for my own part) and it's History & discussion vs. those who visit to these boards because they are* playing clones/inspired bys, buying OSR published materials, BLOGing in the OSR sphere, publishing OSR materials, etc and have an interest in OD&D (however great or small) because it is the the root of these OSR games and product. *any and or all of these things- it's not a parameter you have to conform to exactly |
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jun 20, 2021 10:26:29 GMT -6
Are you sure that none of the "old school" played "story game", or do you think it is the case because you didn't?
When a game, whichever type it is, stop being that type of game to become a story game for you? Or how would you define story game to be?
Right. Exactly. Those are the questions I am asking myself after reading the Illusive Shift. I think jeffb's post helps me think about this a little bit. Maybe it is not so much story-gaming I do not like as much as gaming that focuses on the character rather than the player. I want a good story like anyone else. But I want to challenge the player and I want to be challenged as a player. I do not want to pretend to be engage in amateur theatrics. What I have found is that folks that say the game is about telling a story are folks that want to engage in amateur theatrics. And I just don't personally find that very fun. I am not sure how far back this goes in the hobby. But the shift in rules seems to reflect this. Again, something meant to clarify does not clarify the issue for me. I skew towards the original rules and my own house rules and to TSR era D&D. I like its history and discussion. I also visit these boards because I buy not only old but newly produced material that supports this style of play and these rule sets. I follow a lot of blogs from folks that do the same. I even have my own little "supplement" out there. So, again, where does that place me on your proposed either/or? You can see my confusion. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jun 20, 2021 10:41:45 GMT -6
Are you sure that none of the "old school" played "story game", or do you think it is the case because you didn't?
When a game, whichever type it is, stop being that type of game to become a story game for you? Or how would you define story game to be?
Right. Exactly. Those are the questions I am asking myself after reading the Illusive Shift. I think jeffb's post helps me think about this a little bit. Maybe it is not so much story-gaming I do not like as much as gaming that focuses on the character rather than the player. I want a good story like anyone else. But I want to challenge the player and I want to be challenged as a player. I do not want to pretend to be engage in amateur theatrics. What I have found is that folks that say the game is about telling a story are folks that want to engage in amateur theatrics. And I just don't personally find that very fun. I am not sure how far back this goes in the hobby. But the shift in rules seems to reflect this. Again, something meant to clarify does not clarify the issue for me. I skew towards the original rules and my own house rules and to TSR era D&D. I like its history and discussion. I also visit these boards because I buy not only old but newly produced material that supports this style of play and these rule sets. I follow a lot of blogs from folks that do the same. I even have my own little "supplement" out there. So, again, where does that place me on your proposed either/or? You can see my confusion. I would say you are invested for sure and a fair amount. Please also keep in mind the pl says "today's". I have a ton of OSR stuff in pdf and print, but it's all older material and I've made it clear in my other posts, I'm not supporting or participating what's been going in recent years. |
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jun 20, 2021 11:16:31 GMT -6
I would gather that those interested in "old school", where they really mean the original 3 LBB's (maybe +Greyhawk), are not terribly invested in the OSR. It's questionable how invested they were all along if they actually had the original rule books. This is particularly true if the motive was to provide an outlet for producing supplemental material. Typically, you had this idea of cross compatibility with other editions. So, what was the need?
I don't want to discount the fact that the 3LBB's were not readily accessible for quite a while (except for stuff floating around the web). That vacuum was a real push for people wanting a facsimile of the real thing. But, it seems as if such products took a back seat to the 1e and BX clones right from the start. I'd even say they were a bit of an after thought. And, let's face it, nothing can replace the charm, mystery, and feel of the real thing.
Now that the 3LBB's and the supplements are out there again, I don't see much of a surge of interest in the old boy. Perhaps it's just my perception of the whole period up till now. Or maybe the mystery lost some of it's shine with all the info that's out there now.
|
|
|
|
Post by codeman123 on Jun 20, 2021 12:43:54 GMT -6
I have did some minor investments into the "original" era of OSR. At that point in time i really wanted to support any and all creations to promote old school d&d. I do think it has gotten out of control now though. How many more versions of B/X do we really need? Old school essentials is a good example... why? I already have the originals plus labyrinth lord not to mention probably 5 others like it. The new version of white box was the last OSR product i bought and i cant see myself investing more unless it was something really interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Jun 20, 2021 12:59:22 GMT -6
I hereby define OSR as “Open System Restatement” and include every RPG system that existed before 1975. There.
|
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 20, 2021 14:27:39 GMT -6
To me, OSR signifies the resurgence of people playing and talking about old school D&D and other old school RPGs. If posting here is not an “investment” in the OSR, I don’t know what is.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Jun 20, 2021 14:34:21 GMT -6
How many more versions of B/X do we really need? Old school essentials is a good example... why? Good question, this is how I'd explain it. You have OD&D, the raw unrefined ore. You have B/X or Labyrinth Lord, the refined ore. Then you have OSE which is like taking the refined ore and making a gold Faberge egg. OSE may not be for everyone, but it's incredibly polished and crafted.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2021 14:35:37 GMT -6
Now that the 3LBB's and the supplements are out there again, I don't see much of a surge of interest in the old boy. Perhaps it's just my perception of the whole period up till now. Or maybe the mystery lost some of it's shine with all the info that's out there now. I notice every now and then, something related to OD&D happens, like when Palace of the Vampire Queen got re-released, and there will be these discussions about OD&D, but those are almost invariably about how it influenced things that came later, like AD&D. Very rarely is it discussed for its own merits as a thing people might still be actively interested in playing. |
|
|
|
Post by codeman123 on Jun 20, 2021 14:42:22 GMT -6
How many more versions of B/X do we really need? Old school essentials is a good example... why? Good question, this is how I'd explain it. You have OD&D, the raw unrefined ore. You have B/X or Labyrinth Lord, the refined ore. Then you have OSE which is like taking the refined ore and making a gold Faberge egg. OSE may not be for everyone, but it's incredibly polished and crafted. Maybe it is just me but i thought B/X was very well polished already. Just a personal opinion but i find OSE to be a bit of a mess and it could just be i'm used to the old formatting. It's actually one of the reasons the Moldvay version is one of my favorites in that it is so well organized and "polished". Not to mention that great art... |
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Jun 20, 2021 14:44:33 GMT -6
geoffrey, I can absolutely see why you would vote "all in." But I do not see your contributions as resembling in any way the current cooption and I see your contributions as consistent with the "original" movement. I never got into google+ or any of the later stuff. It's all Greek to me. This place and dragonsfoot are all that I need. As for my published books, nearly all of them were inspired by stuff my group and I were playing or talking about* back in the early 1980s. I think the only exceptions are Isle of the Unknown and Dungeon of the Unknown (both inspired by James Raggi's 2008 Random Esoteric Creature Generator). *Example: When in middle school, one of my fellow D&Ders mentioned some cousin of his who supposedly had a 100-level dungeon (which I found highly doubtful even then). I thought to myself, "Could you imagine how cool that would be?" But I was way, way too lazy to do anything like that. My deepest dungeon back then was 5 levels. This likely fib of my friend's cousin was the tiny seed from which came the 117 levels of Mike's Dungeons.  |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Jun 20, 2021 16:11:13 GMT -6
Now that the 3LBB's and the supplements are out there again, I don't see much of a surge of interest in the old boy. Perhaps it's just my perception of the whole period up till now. Or maybe the mystery lost some of it's shine with all the info that's out there now. OD&D … Very rarely is it discussed for its own merits as a thing people might still be actively interested in playing. My raisin d’etre! |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Jun 20, 2021 16:40:23 GMT -6
How many more versions of B/X do we really need? Old school essentials is a good example... why? Good question, this is how I'd explain it. You have OD&D, the raw unrefined ore. You have B/X or Labyrinth Lord, the refined ore. Then you have OSE which is like taking the refined ore and making a gold Faberge egg. OSE may not be for everyone, but it's incredibly polished and crafted. One cannot play with the Faberge eggs. They’re just for lookin’ at. |
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jun 20, 2021 17:41:47 GMT -6
Very rarely is it discussed for its own merits as a thing people might still be actively interested in playing. That sort of conversation might be somewhat limited to people that you would find on this board. Very few other places. The type set alone is a barrier for some. For most these are artefacts. The aesthetic of older products actually appeals to me, but we have to recognize that these older designs aren't going to sell any products in this day and age. I imagine that is some of the appeal of the clones- they can be a bridge between the old and the new without alienating either group. Raisins are a delicious snack and many start every day with a bowl full of raisin bran. Nothing wrong with that. It's their raison d'etre.  |
|
|
|
Post by badger2305 on Jun 20, 2021 17:46:04 GMT -6
Very rarely is it discussed for its own merits as a thing people might still be actively interested in playing. That sort of conversation might be somewhat limited to people that you would find on this board. Very few other places. The type set alone is a barrier for some. For most these are artefacts. The aesthetic of older products actually appeals to me, but we have to recognize that these older designs aren't going to sell any products in this day and age. I imagine that is some of the appeal of the clones- they can be a bridge between the old and the new without alienating either group. Raisins are a delicious snack and many start every day with a bowl full of raisin bran. Nothing wrong with that. It's their raison d'etre. I'm finding it difficult to remain au currant with this conversation.... |
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jun 20, 2021 18:16:04 GMT -6
I'm finding it difficult to remain au currant with this conversation.... You'll have to prune through the thick of it or else you'll be plum out of luck. |
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Jun 20, 2021 18:25:50 GMT -6
That sort of conversation might be somewhat limited to people that you would find on this board. Very few other places. The type set alone is a barrier for some. For most these are artefacts. The aesthetic of older products actually appeals to me, but we have to recognize that these older designs aren't going to sell any products in this day and age. I imagine that is some of the appeal of the clones- they can be a bridge between the old and the new without alienating either group. Raisins are a delicious snack and many start every day with a bowl full of raisin bran. Nothing wrong with that. It's their raison d'etre. I'm finding it difficult to remain au currant with this conversation.... Ah, a pune or a play on words. You even made it in the Quirmian language, Monsieur Jean-Paul Pune would be proud. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2021 19:07:51 GMT -6
I have did some minor investments into the "original" era of OSR. At that point in time i really wanted to support any and all creations to promote old school d&d. I do think it has gotten out of control now though. How many more versions of B/X do we really need? Old school essentials is a good example... why? I already have the originals plus labyrinth lord not to mention probably 5 others like it. The new version of white box was the last OSR product i bought and i cant see myself investing more unless it was something really interesting. I don't think the "how many more versions of B/X do we really need" type of question is going to produce answers that are persuasive to those not already persuaded. There's no universal "we." Different people come to the hobby with different experiences and different libraries. For example, a polished product like OSE will persuade some who've never really considered B/X to try it (e.g., younger gamers who are looking for polished, amply illustrated product like other modern games on the market). There's nothing wrong with Labyrinth Lord. But it's very much a creature of its era in terms of production values. I understand that this is a subject people are going to disagree about, but even I, an older gamer, appreciate the layout and presentation of today's products over those of 2007 or so, when Labyrinth Lord emerged. I can't say that I need anything more in terms of gaming materials. If I never bought another thing, I'd be fine. More than fine. But I also have 35 years' worth of gaming materials spanning every edition of the game and several other games. Not everyone is in that boat though. Some people are new and building from the ground up. (Need is pretty relative too. I was looking at the number of dice I own this afternoon and wondering how I convinced myself that this amount was necessary.) |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jun 20, 2021 19:27:32 GMT -6
Maybe it is just me but i thought B/X was very well polished already. This ^ |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Jun 20, 2021 20:33:24 GMT -6
I'm finding it difficult to remain au currant with this conversation.... You'll have to prune through the thick of it or else you'll be plum out of luck. Mmmmm…OD&D makes me hunger for more! |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Jun 20, 2021 21:38:49 GMT -6
Just a personal opinion but i find OSE to be a bit of a mess Are we talking about the same books? I can't imagine a more tidy, organized set of RPG rules than OSE. |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Jun 21, 2021 6:04:52 GMT -6
Very rarely is it discussed for its own merits as a thing people might still be actively interested in playing. That sort of conversation might be somewhat limited to people that you would find on this board. Very few other places. The type set alone is a barrier for some. For most these are artefacts. The aesthetic of older products actually appeals to me, but we have to recognize that these older designs aren't going to sell any products in this day and age. I imagine that is some of the appeal of the clones- they can be a bridge between the old and the new without alienating either group. Raisins are a delicious snack and many start every day with a bowl full of raisin bran. Nothing wrong with that. It's their raison d'etre. I’m a victim of circumstance! |
|
|
|
Post by acodispo on Jun 21, 2021 8:33:39 GMT -6
A possibly-somewhat-related question: How do people here feel about the Wikipedia entry for OSR? Feels to me like this reflects something near the "original intent", but also that it's now out of touch with how OSR is really being used/applied these days. I wonder who maintains it? As it's Wikipedia, any one may, but I see robertsconley and aldarron in the timeline (quick glance). And I've just fixed some punctuation, so another answer is: me.
The page could certainly use some reliable sources on recent trends, if anyone is feeling motivated!
|
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 21, 2021 10:06:59 GMT -6
A possibly-somewhat-related question: How do people here feel about the Wikipedia entry for OSR? The articles states, “The OSR was made possible by Wizards of the Coast's release of the OGL in 2000…” This is not true in any sense that I can fathom. IMO, the article way overemphasizes retro-clone rulesets and (other) new commercial products. The OSR hobby as I’ve experienced it here, on Knights & Knaves, on Dragonsfoot, on the Piazza, on Grognardia, etc., from 2001 to this day, is first and foremost about playing and discussing actual old school RPGs, especially OD&D and AD&D. The article never even mentions AD&D, and only mentions OD&D as a basis for retro-clones. |
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jun 21, 2021 10:11:37 GMT -6
The OSR hobby as I’ve experienced it here, on Knights & Knaves, on Dragonsfoot, on the Piazza, on Grognardia, etc., from 2001 to this day, is first and foremost about playing and discussing actual old school RPGs, especially OD&D and AD&D. Based upon the above definition of the OSR (and what folks like geoffrey have said as well), I am finally ready to vote: all in. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2021 10:37:58 GMT -6
A possibly-somewhat-related question: How do people here feel about the Wikipedia entry for OSR? The articles states, “The OSR was made possible by Wizards of the Coast's release of the OGL in 2000…” This is not true in any sense that I can fathom. IMO, the article way overemphasizes retro-clone rulesets and (other) new commercial products. The OSR hobby as I’ve experienced it here, on Knights & Knaves, on Dragonsfoot, on the Piazza, on Grognardia, etc., from 2001 to this day, is first and foremost about playing and discussing actual old school RPGs, especially OD&D and AD&D. The article never even mentions AD&D, and only mentions OD&D as a basis for retro-clones. You could make a solid argument that the success of the earliest retro-clones inspired WOTC to re-release the classic rules and modules via pdf and limited release hardcovers, and to offer POD options. I don't think there would be nearly as many classic D&D products on Drivethru currently if the clones hadn't come along and cut into their business model. I know a lot of you guys already owned the original rules but for a guy like me, they would been a thousand bucks on eBay or nothing up until recently. |
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 21, 2021 10:56:16 GMT -6
There was a notable “boom” of interest in the old school beginning in 2008 or 2009, which was what prompted the concept that there was a temporal Renaissance happening. I was around before, during, and after this phenomenon, so I will give my perspective as to the “perfect storm” which immediately contributed to it. (I will be careful and object to saying they “made it possible.”) - Finarvyn created this forum
- Mythmere released S&W and the Primer
- WotC released the actual OD&D PDFs
- Gary Gygax died
- WotC released 4e (final breaking of 3e hegemony)
Of course there were old school communities and activities before this, but really IMO what triggered the boom was, for the first time ever, widespread access to OD&D proper (through the PDFs), in a world where OD&D had a forum (here) and a publicly-available restatement (S&W). OD&D blew peoples’ minds. It was cool. It was unpretentiously fun. It was mysterious. It offered a DIY ethic which was the perfect escape from endless consumerism of staying current with WotC editions. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2021 11:03:43 GMT -6
There's nothing wrong with Labyrinth Lord. But it's very much a creature of its era in terms of production values. I understand that this is a subject people are going to disagree about, but even I, an older gamer, appreciate the layout and presentation of today's products over those of 2007 or so, when Labyrinth Lord emerged. Sorry about the long reply ahead  :
Although I don't appreciate those new books like OSE, I can understand that's something nice that you can have the game you like in different layouts and presentations that will appeal to different tastes.
I prefer black and white wall of texts, but that's probably just me, really.
I'm not too much into B/X anymore but I think that Labyrinth Lord is an elegant book more close to the classic aesthetics that I like. But as you've said younger games are looking for colorful products, and even older games might prefer modern aesthetics. About they're being polished, that's arguable.
What used to make me a bit sad (and angry) is the propaganda, on making these products looks like they're superior than the original books, when they aren't.
The original books, as disorganized as they can look at first read, have a rich narrative and explanation, the text is very nice written and the authors share a lot of experiences both about playing the game and about how to be a referee or dungeon master as well.
Modern books, indie or not, don't teach you how to be a dungeon master anymore, they only teach rules, it's not the same.
After years of consuming modern products, and I can say that I read a lot of RPG books in my life, I never found any book that really taught me how to prepare a game, how to key a map, how to be a dungeon master, but the old books, specially Holmes, B/X and AD&D DMG which is a gem of a book worth to have even if you're not playing AD&D.
I never saw in any modern books a very nice explanation about dices and probability like Gygax gave in AD&D DMG, through the book you can even understand why the author made some design decisions because the author is not only teaching you some rules, he's having a conversation to you and sharing experiences.
Another book that taught me a lot was the AD&D Dungeoneer's Survival Guide, I know there are people that dislike this book, but it was a very nice finding for me. Then, OD&D, Holmes and B/X had a lot to teach apart from showing me rules and tables, and this experience, the wording and this talk you have with the authors, this can't be "cloned", both because it is copyrighted, and because most modern authors wouldn't have much to share either.
These clones and modern books are just a bunch of rules, numbers and tables in some modern layout and with illustrations. They're empty in "content" and value, which is the priceless wording of the original books. About being disorganized, well, they kind of are... But I guess that's also a problem with kids these days. People don't really know how to read anymore, I'm saying this to you because I'm a teacher and my students definitely don't know how to read or how to take notes. The books can see disorganized at first read, but after you read it once or twice again, you can easily find what you want pretty fast. Bonus points if you really "used" the book, taking notes on it's margins and marking paragraphs. Those are things that help you a lot to understand the content of a book and to memorize where to find a specific information, although I don't have courage myself to write on most of my books if they're expensive. Once you read OD&D, B/X or whatever carefully two or three times you'll probably be able to find the information you need on the fly, specially considering they're booklets.
Maybe part of my "dislike" of the OSR movement is because my country economy isn't good and US$ 30 is a lot for us, expending US$ 30 in a book that's not even close as good as it's was promised can make you really sad, and OSR is all about marketing and promises nowadays. (IMO)
So that's it, the huge marketing about clones and the OSR movement often put those books as superior than the original books, and a lot of people will lose the opportunity to read the real good wording, explanations and experiences written in the originals, that they will never find in any of those modern iterations.
And amazingly, the original books (pdf) are certainly way cheaper than those clones. (Except the free editions of course)
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jun 21, 2021 12:32:20 GMT -6
The articles states, “The OSR was made possible by Wizards of the Coast's release of the OGL in 2000…” This is not true in any sense that I can fathom. IMO, the article way overemphasizes retro-clone rulesets and (other) new commercial products. The OSR hobby as I’ve experienced it here, on Knights & Knaves, on Dragonsfoot, on the Piazza, on Grognardia, etc., from 2001 to this day, is first and foremost about playing and discussing actual old school RPGs, especially OD&D and AD&D. The article never even mentions AD&D, and only mentions OD&D as a basis for retro-clones. You could make a solid argument that the success of the earliest retro-clones inspired WOTC to re-release the classic rules and modules via pdf and limited release hardcovers, and to offer POD options. I don't think there would be nearly as many classic D&D products on Drivethru currently if the clones hadn't come along and cut into their business model. I know a lot of you guys already owned the original rules but for a guy like me, they would been a thousand bucks on eBay or nothing up until recently. WOTC started re-releasing older materials on PDF shortly after 3E was born through a few different download services- I recall one was a company called Bastion Press (D20 OGL producer) , and then I think one more company before Drive Thru. This was well before S&W,LL, OSRIC, or C&C were even a thing and before 3.5 was a thing. At the time WOTC was alloing people to publish (for free) conversions of old TSR modules, and the selling of those old module PDFs fed right into that. Places like ENWORLD (back when it was tolerable) had large collections of homebrew conversions of old materials to 3.X. I bought many of those original PDFs around 2002 ish. It was part of the "back to the dungeon" mantra and I suspect to garner some good will for people who were still wizzed off re: TSR's collapse and 3E's drastic departure. And of course, PROFIT. |
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 21, 2021 12:54:38 GMT -6
IIRC, originally TSR PDFs were made available first on SVGames, then on SVGames + RPGNow, then on RPGNow + Paizo until they were all removed in 2009. But while it was a pretty exhaustive catalog, OD&D itself was only available from 2007 until 2009 (when all the PDFs were removed).
I want to say OD&D was available *very* briefly on SVGames in the early 2000s. But I can’t remember for sure.
|
|
: