Quote from: flyingmice;376982Insight? Yes. It has been very interesting so far. A good discussion. I'm getting a much better handle on what constitutes Old School, and thus what constitutes the fictitious New School. One thing I'm seeing is that there is no New School, because Old School is a new concept. Old School is really a retroactive conceptualization of play, one which we who were running and playing games at the time had no idea of. Old School games are the way they are because of the limitations of the state of game design at the time, not because of conscious choice. Serendipitously, these very limitations of design created room for a certain freedom of play which has a real appeal.

I think this is a great summary, without bias in either direction and which accurately reflects my perception. For whatever that's worth.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;376986I think its a bit simpler than that. Arguing with Old School people, the one unique point of difference, which only occurs when arguing with them, is the philosophy of challenging the player directly.

And while I think that was certainly true of how some people played and may even have been true of the games that Gary Gygax ran, himself, what the articles I posted earlier in this thread shows is that very early in, before the 1970s were over, there were people already not playing those games that way.  And what I suspect is that as soon as people started teaching themselves the hobby, the relatively sparse rules in those early games became the Rorschach test I mentioned earlier.

At the risk of getting lynched, let me offer this from an old rec.games.frp.advocacy FAQ from 1998 written by John Kim:

"gamist": is the style which values setting up a fair challenge for the players (as opposed to the PCs). The challenges may be tactical combat, intellectual mysteries, politics, or anything else. The players will try to solve the problems they are presented with, and in turn the GM will make these challenges solvable if they act intelligently within the contract.

(Yes, I've just added another 59 seconds to the Doomsday clock...)

Or how about Glenn Blacow from 1980:

QuoteIII. WARGAMING

Here one might say that the emphasis is almost the reverse of the role-playing oriented game. The most important facets of this type of game are the tactical abilities of the players and GM, and the mechanics of play. There is a strong tendency towards a relatively low level of magic here, both in quantity and quality, since it is upsetting the GM to have a tactically brilliant setup destroyed when a character pulls out a gadget.

         Wargaming FRP is a competition between the players (as a group) and the GM in which they match wits and skills. He sets up tactical problems which they have to solve for their experience and treasure. Knowhow is all-important, and detailed knowledge of rules a vast help. Since there is a fine edge of danger in the game, developing a character's personality may result in it doing things dysfunctional to survival. Hence the role-playing aspect of the "pure" wargaming approach is often minimal.

         It should be obvious that in a game dominated by this way of thinkng, soft-keying is an extremely dubious practice. The ethic demands that the players survive by their wits, with bad play being rewarded by death. For the GM to arbitrarily reduce the opposition in order to save the party would be as much cheating as adding monsters to raise the death rate would.

         Unlike role-playing based games, killing player characters is an integral and logical part of the game; in fact, many Gms of this school set themselves a desired kill ratio and try to meet it. While this fosters a competitive approach between the GM and players, it usually tends to reduce inter-character fighting. The world is foe enough...

Quote from: John Morrow;376996And while I think that was certainly true of how some people played and may even have been true of the games that Gary Gygax ran, himself, what the articles I posted earlier in this thread shows is that very early in, before the 1970s were over, there were people already not playing those games that way.  And what I suspect is that as soon as people started teaching themselves the hobby, the relatively sparse rules in those early games became the Rorschach test I mentioned earlier.

At the risk of getting lynched, let me offer this from an old rec.games.frp.advocacy FAQ from 1998 written by John Kim:

"gamist": is the style which values setting up a fair challenge for the players (as opposed to the PCs). The challenges may be tactical combat, intellectual mysteries, politics, or anything else. The players will try to solve the problems they are presented with, and in turn the GM will make these challenges solvable if they act intelligently within the contract.

(Yes, I've just added another 59 seconds to the Doomsday clock...)

Or how about Glenn Blacow from 1980:

I don't disagree in the slightest. The RPG and D&D community started moving away from that stuff very early. I'm just saying that there are many aspects of what I've experienced of the "Old School Philosophy" and that particular one is the only part of it you see nowhere else.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;376983Spoken like a true OGL worshipper.

I don't think that's fair. Whether you "worship" or even like the OGL games, it's completely impossible to ignore the massive impact that the OGL had. When 3rd party producers were allowed to make minor D&D supplements and sell them, they could make more money making D&D supplements than pushing their own system. Stuff like Tales From the Floating Vagabond and Toon just didn't get shelf space for several years.

It makes for a very clear and substantial break between new games made in the late nineties and games made in the late oughts. There's a reservoir in the middle where all the shelf space was given over to D&D and d20 stuff, which is turn very much a 90s game in its general feel.

-Frank

Oh Please....

Star Frontiers WAS TRAVELLER-Lite.

TRAVELLER was and is pretty darn Space-Opera ish to start with.
Only reason it gets the 'Hard-Sci Fi' reputation is because it doesn't waste space with tons of illustrations. You actually have text to read.

The artwork on the box, the look of it, the cheezy ads in comic books - that this was clearly aiming at the 7th to 9th grade crowd.

- Ed C.

Quote from: flyingmice;376982Hi John!
As for the Framework thing, that was an aside. I'm a framework designer,so it was important to me, but not at all germane to the discussion. AFAIK, there are no Old School Framework systems.

-clash

Tunnels and Trolls (the second game system after D&D, AFAIK) is probably close, though it actually has two core mechanics - combat and everything else (saving rolls). Though I'm commenting from the perspective of the 5th and 7th editions, so its possible some subsystems might have been stripped out that I'm not aware of.

Quote from: StormBringer;376900This is possibly one of the most ridiculous things you have ever said, Ed.

Amen.

Anyone with a head located outside his ass could see that star frontiers was an attempt to do a star wars RPG without having to bow to Lord Lucas. It was nowhere near traveller in any way and was mainly another "Let's cash in on the star wars phenomena!" (At the time Lucas was demanding too much for the license for a star wars rpg.)

Traveller was more about making a buck and making the ship's mortgage payment any way you could, while star frontiers was more about racking up XP, killing bad guys, being heroes and getting more powerful gear.

Traveller frequently took a dark side approach with many players being mercs, smugglers, pirates, etc. Star frontiers was more about players being good guys and working for the system.

Quote from: Koltar;377008Oh Please....

Star Frontiers WAS TRAVELLER-Lite.

TRAVELLER was and is pretty darn Space-Opera ish to start with.
Only reason it gets the 'Hard-Sci Fi' reputation is because it doesn't waste space with tons of illustrations. You actually have text to read.

The artwork on the box, the look of it, the cheezy ads in comic books - that this was clearly aiming at the 7th to 9th grade crowd.

- Ed C.

Lots of games were marketed to kids in those days- especially TSR games; that has nothing to do with Traveller.  I played both games and they were nothing at all like one another.
To sum up: Bitch, you crazy.

Star Frontiers was typical TSR approach to gaming, making whatever core product an extension of D&D into that genre. Boot Hill was a D&D Western while Gamma World was Post-Apocalyptic D&D. Star Frontiers wasn't so much Star Wars as it was generic TV action-adventure science fiction adapted D&D.

Knight Hawks came about, I think, because sales of Star Frontiers were slumping since most science fiction games need space travel as a part to maintain interest. It was thrown together haphazrdly with parts stolen from wherever like the UPF (not a Star Trek UFP rip-off at all), and the trade section from Traveller along with the weapon vs defense concept from High Guard in the miniatures combat portion.

TSR tried to get some hard science cred with Star Frontiers when they did the 2001 and 2010 modules, but it is really hard to do a novel as a module without it becomming a plothammer railroad.

Quote from: FrankTrollman;377007I don't think that's fair. Whether you "worship" or even like the OGL games, it's completely impossible to ignore the massive impact that the OGL had. When 3rd party producers were allowed to make minor D&D supplements and sell them, they could make more money making D&D supplements than pushing their own system. Stuff like Tales From the Floating Vagabond and Toon just didn't get shelf space for several years.

It makes for a very clear and substantial break between new games made in the late nineties and games made in the late oughts. There's a reservoir in the middle where all the shelf space was given over to D&D and d20 stuff, which is turn very much a 90s game in its general feel.

-Frank

I don't think the OGL was as massive as some people think, and I don't think it was as positive as some people think. I don't think the OGL really grew the hobby, it just displaced much of the non-D&D landscape. I also think it really muddied the concept of what D&D was and what it was not, between 3E trying to be everything to everybody(and ending up being half-assed or conflicted in the process) and the OGL allowing 3rd parties to take things even further from the base.

Quote from: jeff37923;377017Star Frontiers was typical TSR approach to gaming, making whatever core product an extension of D&D into that genre. Boot Hill was a D&D Western while Gamma World was Post-Apocalyptic D&D. Star Frontiers wasn't so much Star Wars as it was generic TV action-adventure science fiction adapted D&D.

Knight Hawks came about, I think, because sales of Star Frontiers were slumping since most science fiction games need space travel as a part to maintain interest. It was thrown together haphazrdly with parts stolen from wherever like the UPF (not a Star Trek UFP rip-off at all), and the trade section from Traveller along with the weapon vs defense concept from High Guard in the miniatures combat portion.

TSR tried to get some hard science cred with Star Frontiers when they did the 2001 and 2010 modules, but it is really hard to do a novel as a module without it becomming a plothammer railroad.

Now that makes sense.  

I still have to check the rules from High Guard, but I will provisionally agree on that.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;377018I don't think the OGL was as massive as some people think, and I don't think it was as positive as some people think. I don't think the OGL really grew the hobby, it just displaced much of the non-D&D landscape. I also think it really muddied the concept of what D&D was and what it was not, between 3E trying to be everything to everybody(and ending up being half-assed or conflicted in the process) and the OGL allowing 3rd parties to take things even further from the base.

Whether it was good or not depends largely on who you are. Certainly, if you were Wizards of the Coast it is difficult to cast it in anything but a positive light. They made huge money during that period. As you noted, they displaced much o the non-D&D landscape, and they sold Player's Handbooks to all that land. That's a good thing, for them.

But yeah, I'm on record as hating d20 Modern. I think it's a crap system that doesn't work at all. The whole d20 premise was a bad one for precisely the reason that the cross genre attempts to port GURPS or HERO were bad ideas - a system really does influence what kind of story it tells. And HERO tells 4 Color Supers stories, and Fantasy HERO can suck my nuts. D&D tell stories about iron age heroes who stab monsters in the face for money, and d20 Future sucks.

Which means that I'll agree with you that the over-all positivity of the OGL revolution is grossly overstated by many people. But I don't believe that over estimating its impact is done very often. Sure Eclipse Phase is an innovative percentile based system now, but if it had been made five years ago, it would have been like T20 - another half assed attempt to make the square peg of D&D hit points and exponential levels fit into the round hole of space ships, credit cards, and plasma cannons.

-Frank

Quote from: Koltar;377008Star Frontiers WAS TRAVELLER-Lite.

I'm not seeing this, either.  

At the time, I opened up Star Frontiers and thought it was more like D&D in Spaaaaace!  And with respect to Star Frontiers, Traveller, and "Hard-Sci-Fi", one of the first things you should notice about Traveller in combat is that most people are walking around with automatic pistols and assault rifles that shoot bullets.  In Star Frontiers, there are 20 shot laser pistols with small energy packs and things like gyrojet guns and sonic stunners.  Traveller's iconic bad guys were humans with telepathy while Star Frontiers had nasty space snakes.  Traveller characters could have skills in Administration, Streetwise, Steward, but you don't find anything like that in Star Frontiers.  In fact, Star Frontiers originally assumed that PCs would be getting paid to do missions and that's pretty much it.

The matter of whether Star Frontiers is or is not Traveller Lite deserves its own thread, don't you think?

-clash

Quote from: flyingmice;377037The matter of whether Star Frontiers is or is not Traveller Lite deserves its own thread, don't you think?

Hey, I tried to put your thread back on track...