|
Post by jeffb on Jun 21, 2021 13:26:10 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. Those names sound familiar. I think SV games was part of Bastion Press (who was run and owned by a former 3.0 big wig at WOTC- EDIT- Jim Butler). WOTC had a special name for these downloads that I can't recall EDIT- It was called the ESD program (electronic secure download?) I sold most of RPG collection around 2k5, and I picked up the PDFs of OD&D and supps at that time to console myself.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 21, 2021 13:55:19 GMT -6
Bastion Press was responsible for scanning the TSR products. They had no particular connection to SV Games, no more than to RPGNow or Paizo, it’s just the connection might be strong in your mind since SV Games was the first storefront that was used.
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jun 21, 2021 14:01:04 GMT -6
Bastion Press was responsible for scanning the TSR products. They had no particular connection to SV Games, no more than to RPGNow or Paizo, it’s just the connection might be strong in your mind since SV Games was the first storefront that was used. Ok. That sounds about right. Thank you. I do recall Bastion was scanning everything because Jim Butler would be on ENWORLD every couple of weeks giving an update when someone would ask "when is X going to be ready? this wait sucks!" or " The Map scans for X suck!" or "There is page bleed-through on X, the scan sucks!".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2021 15:05:26 GMT -6
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. You are correct in that some were available back then, and the whole "back to the dungeon" sales pitch, but it seems that there's been a meteoric rise in what's available and especially things like POD options in recent years. They haven't officially commented on what spurred this but I suspect they noticed how well certain companies were doing at conventions and in sales (Goodman Games, etc.) and put two and two together that these old modules and systems have a wide audience to this day.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jun 22, 2021 5:32:22 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. The Internet in the form of Dragonsfoot, Knights & Knaves, etc. was and still is a major factor in that it connected separate "islands" of old school, older editions interests. And something that predated the release of OSRIC and Basic Fantasy. However without the D20 SRD, and OGL, the inability to publish would have meant there were limits to what this community could do with their interest. With OSRIC and Basic Fantasy as an example, 95% of those limits were eliminated and the boundaries were made far more clearer. The made a lot more people, including myself, more comfortable in releasing projects using and building on older edition IP. In a nutshell the d20 SRD and OGL transformed a interest group into a full fledged niche of the hobby without being beholden to the whims of a single publisher.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jun 22, 2021 6:09:37 GMT -6
but it seems that there's been a meteoric rise in what's available and especially things like POD options in recent years. Folks can see this for themselves by looking at the Hoard and Horde spreadsheet by Guy Fullerton. It is fairly complete for works targeting the classic editions up until April 2012 and limited to what Guy happened to come across after that. docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LUFmadXbg67pp9dEu_KsLc2-2Gf-0t5mVOvzetAqdFw/edit#gid=0
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jun 22, 2021 6:19:14 GMT -6
A counter-question: Do we really? This forum is pretty active. Dragonsfoot is pretty active. There are active Reddit and (I'm told) Facebook groups for all the TSR-era games and old school RPGs in general. It seems to me that plenty of people are still enjoying these games, or discovering them for the first time, with or without a label attached. Plus all the material we can use for specific older editions remains open content. Free (in both sense of the word) for anybody to use to realize their idea for a specific edition in whatever the form they like, commercial, or just shared. Alongside that there are examples of people successfully publishing or sharing works that don't use the Open Game License that also target older editions. While other can't build on those due to copyright, they can serve as a template for folks who don't like the idea of using the OGL.
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Jun 22, 2021 6:29:46 GMT -6
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. I have gotten crap for consistently using OSR as a shorthand for the group of hobbyists who plays, promotes, and publishes for the classic editions of Dungeons & Dragons. My counterpoints are: 1) That is what the label was first used for when I first started using it back in 2008. 2) That regardless of the label there will continue to be a group of hobbyists who plays, promotes, and publish for the classic editions. 3) That the Old School Renaissance is part of a larger old school renaissance. 4) That the OSR, as I use the term, was never just about the classic edition. It also include individual other interests but only the interest in the classic edition can be considered universal among this group of hobbyists. Everything else depends on the group or individual being talked about. For example I like Traveller, GURPS, Hero Systems, Harnmaster, etc and regularly talk about them and support these systems on my blog. 5) Finally the OSR is an organic term that grew because it was fun to use for example TSR versus OSR. As such anybody is free to try to impose their own definition or read whatever they want into it. But even limited to stuff surrounding the classic edition, it has to be qualified because not all classic editions or classic editions material are the same (thank God). So people wind up using or marketing other more specific terms, like AD&D, OD&D, Swords & Wizardry, OSRIC, Old School Essentials. Some use some form of OSR trademark but most, like myself rely on getting their name out there or another terms (like OSRIC) out there.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Jun 22, 2021 8:57:10 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jun 22, 2021 9:10:57 GMT -6
Maybe a better question would be: Do you identify with the OSR
> yes, in the past > yes, but I’m a newcomer > yes, from a publishing perspective > yes, all the way > no, not really
Or something like that
|
|
|
Post by rsdean on Jun 25, 2021 6:03:03 GMT -6
Somehow, I feel a manifesto coming on. Anyway, as far as the OSR goes, I’m glad it happened, since it raises the odds that I might actually get my next game together, but as a DM (intermittantly) since 1976, and one who doesn’t generally use ‘commercial’ products (long list of possible exceptions elided), it’s kind of irrelevant to me now. My fun in this is mostly from building my own stuff.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2021 10:04:49 GMT -6
I love pre-WOTC D&D. I love all the work that's been done by members of this board like Swords & Wizardry and Delving Deeper. I love this board, but it's not an affiliation for me - more like an academic symposium I like to pop into.
And I believe the OSR accomplished its goal years ago: reintroducing rules and a style of play that were in danger of being lost. Everything since is branding. Am I invested? I own the games. But as a scene? No thank you. The warring factions in RPGs - a niche inside a niche - are like watching poets fight: everyone is super earnest, and the rest of the world doesn't care.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2021 16:19:53 GMT -6
For me, it was never a fight. It was about accessing a feeling I had as a kid again. I was lucky to be part of a generation that still had TSR-driven D&D as a kid, albeit a late-stage version. Then, years later, when I revisited that particular hobby, I found my beloved version of the game was no longer being sold or actively played by anyone, apparently. It's like losing your beloved childhood movie collection in a fire or something. The boom in "retro-gaming" in general is something I cherish. I can go on GoG and download Pool of Radiance or Ultima VII, and I can go on DriveThruRPG and download the specific D&D rules set from my childhood if I wish, all because a bunch of people came together and communicated that they still love these things and would pay money for them. That's one of the magical things about the internet.
|
|
|
Post by Greyharp on Jun 26, 2021 0:05:45 GMT -6
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.
I suspect that most old school types must have missed this very small window of opportunity to get TSR pdfs, with 3.0 not lasting very long (less than 2 years) before it was replaced by 3.5. Personally I don't recall any legal downloads of TSR products in the early 2000s, but then I've never had an account on Enworld and at the time didn't lurk there very often because of its D20 focus.
The retroclones started coming out in the mid-2000s and from memory this article is correct in saying that WotC didn't start releasing copies of TSR pdfs until 2012, long after most major retroclones were established and the OSR was already getting long in the tooth.
I was actively following the development of Labyrinth Lord and OSRIC at the time and to a lesser degree Basic Fantasy and Swords & Wizardry, and I remember quite clearly that one of the major justifications for developing the retroclones was to get TSR D&D back into print and make it easier for DMs to get rulebooks into the hands of their gaming groups. This was because, at the time, there were no legal pdfs of the old rulebooks available.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2021 5:49:59 GMT -6
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.
I suspect that most old school types must have missed this very small window of opportunity to get TSR pdfs, with 3.0 not lasting very long (less than 2 years) before it was replaced by 3.5. Personally I don't recall any legal downloads of TSR products in the early 2000s, but then I've never had an account on Enworld and at the time didn't lurk there very often because of its D20 focus.
The retroclones started coming out in the mid-2000s and from memory this article is correct in saying that WotC didn't start releasing copies of TSR pdfs until 2012, long after most major retroclones were established and the OSR was already getting long in the tooth.
I was actively following the development of Labyrinth Lord and OSRIC at the time and to a lesser degree Basic Fantasy and Swords & Wizardry, and I remember quite clearly that one of the major justifications for developing the retroclones was to get TSR D&D back into print and make it easier for DMs to get rulebooks into the hands of their gaming groups. This was because, at the time, there were no legal pdfs of the old rulebooks available.
Yep. A lot of us missed that earlier window entirely. As far as I knew until relatively recently, after doing a deep-dive into the subject, the hardcover AD&D book re-release was the beginning of the older materials becoming available again, and this was a reaction to the success of the burgeoning OSR. This was around the same time you first released your single volume OD&D compilation, wasn't it? (Thanks for that, by the way. It's my table-copy!)
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jun 26, 2021 8:01:13 GMT -6
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. I suspect that most old school types must have missed this very small window of opportunity to get TSR pdfs, with 3.0 not lasting very long (less than 2 years) before it was replaced by 3.5. Personally I don't recall any legal downloads of TSR products in the early 2000s, but then I've never had an account on Enworld and at the time didn't lurk there very often because of its D20 focus.
The retroclones started coming out in the mid-2000s and from memory this article is correct in saying that WotC didn't start releasing copies of TSR pdfs until 2012, long after most major retroclones were established and the OSR was already getting long in the tooth. I was actively following the development of Labyrinth Lord and OSRIC at the time and to a lesser degree Basic Fantasy and Swords & Wizardry, and I remember quite clearly that one of the major justifications for developing the retroclones was to get TSR D&D back into print and make it easier for DMs to get rulebooks into the hands of their gaming groups. This was because, at the time, there were no legal pdfs of the old rulebooks available.
It was not a small window. They had PDFs available of many TSR products for sale until around 2008. It was during the 4e management era that WOTC took them (all) down. They put them up again during NEXT's playtest. After the reprints of various edition core books and adventure compilations (S series, A series) sold out, they started putting up all the edition core books as PDFs. Some rules like AD&D (both versions) were never available in this early period, yes. However my point in the passage you quoted was that WOTC knew there was a demand for OS TSR era products well before there was ever discussion about retroclones. They were releasing old modules for years before OSRIC saw release. It was not that the introduction of the retroclones showed WOTC how much demand there was for old editions/products. They already knew.
|
|
aramis
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 170
|
Post by aramis on Jun 26, 2021 8:21:27 GMT -6
So much so that I have to admit to finding quite insulting the use of the phrase I see popping up fairly regularly lately: “The so called "OSR" movement”. I’m not suggesting this is intended to be personally insulting to anyone, but the phrase “so called” seems to infer that there was never such a thing as the Old School Revival (or whatever R-word people prefer), either that or those of us involved in the scene were delusional to use the term. You could take in account that not necessarily everyone on internet is from USA or speak English fluently, most of us are doing our best to communicate and exchange experiences on internet. I can see how the term "so called" can bring a cultural stigma for some people, but for a lot others it doesn't mean nothing else than what it should mean, which I guess could be an alternative way to say "what they call". Most of time when we fell insulted by something, it can be pretty much we insulting ourselves, since we attach arbitrary (non-existent) meanings to things. I never saw someone using the term to imply that you guys are being delusional, but maybe my English isn't really good enough to understand those kind of details. If you felt insulted I ask you sorry.
In standard American writing, the use of "Scare Quotes" and the term "so-called" combine to a very strongly implicit accusation of the term being wrong somehow. "so called" is axiomatically accusing the object of the adjective of not matching its name. the use of "scare quotes" is axipmatically the author distancing themselves from whatever is the noun modified. So, yeah, it's pretty much aimed at giving offense, by accusing those accepting the label as not doing what the label implies.
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jun 26, 2021 9:16:13 GMT -6
It was not a small window. They had PDFs available of many TSR products for sale until around 2008. It was during the 4e management era that WOTC took them (all) down. They put them up again during NEXT's playtest. After the reprints of various edition core books and adventure compilations (S series, A series) sold out, they started putting up all the edition core books as PDFs. Some rules like AD&D (both versions) were never available in this early period, yes. However my point in the passage you quoted was that WOTC knew there was a demand for OS TSR era products well before there was ever discussion about retroclones. They were releasing old modules for years before OSRIC saw release. It was not that the introduction of the retroclones showed WOTC how much demand there was for old editions/products. They already knew. The atmosphere of this early period is sometimes hard to recapture when looking back. One thing I know is that there was a tangible fear of legal repercussions for people desiring, not only to publish, but even wanting to post certain early edition content on blogs. People felt like they had to walk on their tip toes and use coded language to avoid giving the appearance of messing with IP. What was that saying people attached when writing about D&D? "For use with the worlds most popular/famous roleplaying game" or something like that. I really disliked that. As a consequence there was an inevitable resentment with WOTC by people that still wanted to support the old games. I think pulling the pdf's, whether they recognized the demand or not, was really the final straw.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 26, 2021 9:23:27 GMT -6
I have to admit I enjoy the phrase the so-called OSR for no particular reason. Lends an air of knowing aloofness.
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jun 26, 2021 9:44:26 GMT -6
It was not a small window. They had PDFs available of many TSR products for sale until around 2008. It was during the 4e management era that WOTC took them (all) down. They put them up again during NEXT's playtest. After the reprints of various edition core books and adventure compilations (S series, A series) sold out, they started putting up all the edition core books as PDFs. Some rules like AD&D (both versions) were never available in this early period, yes. However my point in the passage you quoted was that WOTC knew there was a demand for OS TSR era products well before there was ever discussion about retroclones. They were releasing old modules for years before OSRIC saw release. It was not that the introduction of the retroclones showed WOTC how much demand there was for old editions/products. They already knew. The atmosphere of this early period is sometimes hard to recapture when looking back. One thing I know is that there was a tangible fear of legal repercussions for people desiring, not only to publish, but even wanting to post certain early edition content on blogs. People felt like they had to walk on their tip toes and use coded language to avoid giving the appearance of messing with IP. What was that saying people attached when writing about D&D? "For use with the worlds most popular/famous roleplaying game" or something like that. I really disliked that. As a consequence there was an inevitable resentment with WOTC by people that still wanted to support the old games. I think pulling the pdf's, whether they recognized the demand or not, was really the final straw. I'm definitely not saying they handled it well. I'm just commenting that WOTC was very aware of the demand long before retroclones were a thing, and were catering to that demand in the way they saw fit business-wise. And the "legalese" was part of the OGL. I remember some times when WOTC asked ENWORLD to take down all the conversion documents because people were actually retyping the modules and adding the 3.X stats. One of the big reasons (stated by Scott Rouse, head D&D guy at the onset of 4E) they pulled EVERYTHING was that not long after the 4E Books went on sale, they really got a handle on the number of illegal PDFs out there for all their products. True or not, I don't know. But I had alot of convos with Scott over @ EnWorld, and IME he was a pretty standup guy. Probably not what WOTC wanted as head of D&D- He was a bit too honest and open.
|
|
|
Post by tombowings on Jun 26, 2021 9:53:05 GMT -6
In standard American writing, the use of "Scare Quotes" and the term "so-called" combine to a very strongly implicit accusation of the term being wrong somehow. "so called" is axiomatically accusing the object of the adjective of not matching its name. the use of "scare quotes" is axipmatically the author distancing themselves from whatever is the noun modified. So, yeah, it's pretty much aimed at giving offense, by accusing those accepting the label as not doing what the label implies. I have to disagree. The misuse of quotation marks is a poor writing.
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jun 26, 2021 11:15:42 GMT -6
I'm definitely not saying they handled it well. I'm just commenting that WOTC was very aware of the demand long before retroclones were a thing, and were catering to that demand in the way they saw fit business-wise. And the "legalese" was part of the OGL. I remember some times when WOTC asked ENWORLD to take down all the conversion documents because people were actually retyping the modules and adding the 3.X stats. One of the big reasons (stated by Scott Rouse, head D&D guy at the onset of 4E) they pulled EVERYTHING was that not long after the 4E Books went on sale, they really got a handle on the number of illegal PDFs out there for all their products. True or not, I don't know. But I had alot of convos with Scott over @ EnWorld, and IME he was a pretty standup guy. Probably not what WOTC wanted as head of D&D- He was a bit too honest and open. I wasn't trying to suggest you were defending WOTC. I was just reflecting. It's odd to think about how things have changed so rapidly. I wasn't a long standing part of the hobby. The last D&D I played was 1e before giving it up in my teens. When I returned and wanted to recapture those games some time in 2010, it wasn't easily found. I spent a while surfing the web and reading blogs. The first games I tried were C&C and Stuckey's M74. I started writing my own game in 2011 (largely influenced by and adopting parts of M74) called Kingdoms, Clerics and Crusaders. Then I rediscovered T&T with it's quickstart rules and Goblin Lake. I visited, but didn't join any forums until 2012. I've always been a late adopter. I still had a flip phone up until a year ago, still had dial up connection up until about 10 years ago, and didn't even have internet at all 20 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Greyharp on Jun 26, 2021 18:27:18 GMT -6
You could take in account that not necessarily everyone on internet is from USA or speak English fluently, most of us are doing our best to communicate and exchange experiences on internet. I can see how the term "so called" can bring a cultural stigma for some people, but for a lot others it doesn't mean nothing else than what it should mean, which I guess could be an alternative way to say "what they call". Most of time when we fell insulted by something, it can be pretty much we insulting ourselves, since we attach arbitrary (non-existent) meanings to things. I never saw someone using the term to imply that you guys are being delusional, but maybe my English isn't really good enough to understand those kind of details. If you felt insulted I ask you sorry.
In standard American writing, the use of "Scare Quotes" and the term "so-called" combine to a very strongly implicit accusation of the term being wrong somehow. "so called" is axiomatically accusing the object of the adjective of not matching its name. the use of "scare quotes" is axipmatically the author distancing themselves from whatever is the noun modified. So, yeah, it's pretty much aimed at giving offense, by accusing those accepting the label as not doing what the label implies.
It's all good. Jack and I had a chat via private message and as English is not his first language it came down to a misunderstanding of the subtleties of English phrasing. No offense was intended.
I was doing a bit of reading of my defunct blog from a decade ago (in relation to the wiki history of the OSR thread) and I saw that even back then people were using the phrase "so-called" in relation to the OSR and it got my goat back then. Those people did have English as their first language and definitely did use the term in a dismissive manner.
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jun 26, 2021 20:14:51 GMT -6
I'm definitely not saying they handled it well. I'm just commenting that WOTC was very aware of the demand long before retroclones were a thing, and were catering to that demand in the way they saw fit business-wise. And the "legalese" was part of the OGL. I remember some times when WOTC asked ENWORLD to take down all the conversion documents because people were actually retyping the modules and adding the 3.X stats. One of the big reasons (stated by Scott Rouse, head D&D guy at the onset of 4E) they pulled EVERYTHING was that not long after the 4E Books went on sale, they really got a handle on the number of illegal PDFs out there for all their products. True or not, I don't know. But I had alot of convos with Scott over @ EnWorld, and IME he was a pretty standup guy. Probably not what WOTC wanted as head of D&D- He was a bit too honest and open. I wasn't trying to suggest you were defending WOTC. I was just reflecting. It's odd to think about how things have changed so rapidly. No worries, I didn't take any offense. I just wanted to clarify. FWIW I was a fan of WOTC taking over for TSR and those late 2E products, the early 3.0 period (though for sure, I was a critical fan of the ruleset) left for 3.5, and came back excited and was throughout for 4th edition. It's only in the last 6 years or so that they've completely alienated me.
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jun 26, 2021 21:09:07 GMT -6
No worries, I didn't take any offense. I just wanted to clarify. FWIW I was a fan of WOTC taking over for TSR and those late 2E products, the early 3.0 period (though for sure, I was a critical fan of the ruleset) left for 3.5, and came back excited and was throughout for 4th edition. It's only in the last 6 years or so that they've completely alienated me. That's funny. You know how I said I'm a late adopter. I recently bought the Essentials Kit with the thought that I would give 5e a try, rationalizing its appeal for my kids. I had read through the basic rules when they originally came out. Here we are how many years later and I'm only now attempting to use it in play. But I'm at a stand still with it. The design is a real hang up for me for some reason. I just can't get into it.
|
|
|
Post by rsdean on Jun 27, 2021 3:47:39 GMT -6
I had read through the basic rules when they originally came out. Here we are how many years later and I'm only now attempting to use it in play. But I'm at a stand still with it. The design is a real hang up for me for some reason. I just can't get into it. The two files of the Basic Rules (which, btw, it is nice that they make freely available) total 207 A4 sized pages, compared to the 3LBB’s 112 A5 pages, so roughly 4 times as much surface area covered. That’s not exactly terse, and I do find that my ability to absorb hundreds of (new) pages anymore is pretty limited. Hence, my favorite modern systems are things like Fate Accelerated Edition at 48 A5 pages or storygame things like The Quiet Year or The Fall of Magic.
|
|
|
Post by tombowings on Jun 27, 2021 5:20:07 GMT -6
The two files of the Basic Rules (which, btw, it is nice that they make freely available) total 207 A4 sized pages, compared to the 3LBB’s 112 A5 pages, so roughly 4 times as much surface area covered. That’s not exactly terse, and I do find that my ability to absorb hundreds of (new) pages anymore is pretty limited. Hence, my favorite modern systems are things like Fate Accelerated Edition at 48 A5 pages or storygame things like The Quiet Year or The Fall of Magic. Hence the importance of intuitive rules.
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Jun 27, 2021 6:04:58 GMT -6
No worries, I didn't take any offense. I just wanted to clarify. FWIW I was a fan of WOTC taking over for TSR and those late 2E products, the early 3.0 period (though for sure, I was a critical fan of the ruleset) left for 3.5, and came back excited and was throughout for 4th edition. It's only in the last 6 years or so that they've completely alienated me. That's funny. You know how I said I'm a late adopter. I recently bought the Essentials Kit with the thought that I would give 5e a try, rationalizing its appeal for my kids. I had read through the basic rules when they originally came out. Here we are how many years later and I'm only now attempting to use it in play. But I'm at a stand still with it. The design is a real hang up for me for some reason. I just can't get into it. I could give you a laundry list of reasons why I'm not a fan, but we would be getting way OT. But I did run it a fair amount after release and playtest it (during that phase). It's a solid game at face value (in the 3 corebooks/Basic rules). BITD I tried to get my son playing in older editions first- I even got Frank Mentzer's play copies in an attempt to get him interested. I got him 2E, 3.0,3,5 and 4E starter sets, and IDR what else. One day he had some friends over, they were bored, I was bored and I pulled out the 3.5 Black Dragon basic set ( I am not a minis fan for gaming, but I figured the kids would love them). And we ran games for nearly 6 years steady after that going through all kinds of clones, and TSR and modern games. It was sporadic as they approached senior HS years, and then college came and it dropped off completely except during the summers. So, even something you don't personally care for can end up being a catalyst for something greater!
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jun 27, 2021 8:31:57 GMT -6
The two files of the Basic Rules (which, btw, it is nice that they make freely available) total 207 A4 sized pages, compared to the 3LBB’s 112 A5 pages, so roughly 4 times as much surface area covered. That’s not exactly terse, and I do find that my ability to absorb hundreds of (new) pages anymore is pretty limited. Hence, my favorite modern systems are things like Fate Accelerated Edition at 48 A5 pages or storygame things like The Quiet Year or The Fall of Magic. I hear you. I have very little interest or time to invest into cumbersome rule books. I wish I could say that is the case except the Essential Box has boiled down the basic rules to about 40 pages. Outside of character creation the core rules are probably only a couple pages. I could give you a laundry list of reasons why I'm not a fan, but we would be getting way OT. Yeah, sorry to have drifted into 5e territory. Though it does fit if you accept 5e being partly shaped by pressures from the old school community.
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Jun 28, 2021 13:45:43 GMT -6
|
|