SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Who Gives a Fuck About the OSR?

Started by One Horse Town, October 22, 2015, 11:28:11 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

estar

Quote from: Tetsubo;863889Thanks for the thought. I just have no interest in the OSR movement. I started in 1978. Back when 'old school' was the only school we had. I abandoned it as soon as something better arrived. I've read numerous OSR systems and found them all wanting.

How so? Note I am not implying you should find classic D&D editions useful. I am interested your particular reasons. And what RPGs do you play?

Zevious Zoquis

Quote from: Tetsubo;863889Thanks for the thought. I just have no interest in the OSR movement. I started in 1978. Back when 'old school' was the only school we had. I abandoned it as soon as something better arrived. I've read numerous OSR systems and found them all wanting.

That's nice.  However, it's worth noting that your (and others in this thread) lack of interest in "the OSR movement," such as it is, in no way invalidates that "movement."  Just based on the results of the poll here it looks as though something like half of the rpg community does appreciate some aspect of what has come to be known as The OSR.  Whatever the reasons may be - nostalgia, one-true-wayism, whatever - it appears a significant contingent actually kinda likes this thing called The OSR.  

I haven't really read the OSR blogs in several years, but I recall a lot more "bending over backwards to NOT be edition-war-ish" than I do actual one-true-wayism in most of those blogs.  I always find the butt-hurt respons eof some folks to the OSR really strange since most of the people who have become strongly associated with the OSR have always seemed like really nice, pretty fair-minded and harmless folks to me.  I mean they like their game, and they are kind enough to self-identify as part of a specific thing so that if you don't like that thing you can safely ignore them...

Bren

#167
Quote from: Zevious Zoquis;863901That's nice.  However, it's worth noting that your (and others in this thread) lack of interest in "the OSR movement," such as it is, in no way invalidates that "movement."
1. I didn't notice anyone suggest that it did.

QuoteJust based on the results of the poll here it looks as though something like half of the rpg community does appreciate some aspect of what has come to be known as The OSR.
2. Which tells us what the people on this site who answered the poll think. They may or may not be representative of the site in general. People who post on RPG forums don't appear to be representative of the mass of people who play RPGs, so it probably doesn't tell us anything about what RPG players in general think about the OSR.

3. For any RPG X, the number of people who buy or play game X says nothing about the merit, suitability, or quality of game X. Yet people frequently post and act as if it does. The number of people who like Tutti-fruitti ice cream is irrelevant to whether or not I like the flavor.

4. Obviously the number of people who buy game X is relevant to marketing and business decisions about game X, about products that support game X, and about games that may compete with game X. Therefore, the number of people who like Tutti-Fruitti ice cream is relevant to how easy it is to buy Tutti-Fruitti ice cream.
Currently running: Runequest in Glorantha + Call of Cthulhu   Currently playing: D&D 5E + RQ
My Blog: For Honor...and Intrigue
I have a gold medal from Ravenswing and Gronan owes me bee

estar

Quote from: Bren;8639103. For any RPG X, the number of people who buy or play game X says nothing about the quality of game X. Yet people frequently post and act as if it does.

That is pure utter nonsense bullshit. The basic point to releasing any RPG material (commercial or not) to have people use it. The numbers tell you how effective your approach was. And it is only measure that is worth having.

In the short term a hyped game can sell more copies then it's usefulness and quality merits. But it evens out over the long run and over successive related products.

it applies even to specialized RPGs with a deliberate appeal to a narrow range of interest. In this case the number tell you how effective was the approach toward the target audience. If RPG A reached 500 out of a potential 1,000 customers, and RPG B reached 1,000 out of a potential 10,000 customers. Then I would say RPG A is more of a success as it succeeded in reaching more of it's intended audience.

With the above being said, it is useless as measure of a product's value for an individual gamer. What a individual gamer perceives as useful and interesting depends solely on their unique personality. The best thing an author can is clearly communicate what is his game is about and what the focus of it. That way the potential customer doesn't have to put a lot of effort in deciding whether to download or buy the product.

Zevious Zoquis

#169
Quote from: Bren;8639101. I didn't notice anyone suggest that it did.

It seems pretty apparent to me based on reading the OP that the point of this poll was to offer an opportunity to "bash" the OSR.  That didn't really happen...at least not in any nearly unanimous way.

Quote2. Which tells us what the people on this site who answered the poll think. They may or may not be representative of the site in general. People who post on RPG forums don't appear to be representative of the mass of people who play RPGs, so it probably doesn't tell us anything about what RPG players in general think about the OSR.

The poll was posted on this site.  If the results of the poll posted on this site don't mean anything, why post the poll on this site at all?  

Irregardless of that, what it tells us is there are at least 50 or so people who think the OSR stuff is OK.  Since the OSR is a "movement" started by hobbyists for hobbyists, there's no particular reason it needs more of a following than that.

Quote3. For any RPG X, the number of people who buy or play game X says nothing about the merit, suitability, or quality of game X. Yet people frequently post and act as if it does. The number of people who like Tutti-fruitti ice cream is irrelevant to whether or not I like the flavor.

4. Obviously the number of people who buy game X is relevant to marketing and business decisions about game X, about products that support game X, and about games that may compete with game X. Therefore, the number of people who like Tutti-Fruitti ice cream is relevant to how easy it is to buy Tutti-Fruitti ice cream.

Which has nothing to do with anything we are talking about really...

Gronan of Simmerya

Quote from: Tetsubo;863889Thanks for the thought. I just have no interest in the OSR movement. I started in 1978. Back when 'old school' was the only school we had. I abandoned it as soon as something better arrived. I've read numerous OSR systems and found them all wanting.

And I stayed with OD&D because I still like it better than anything else I've tried.

Funny ol' world, innit?  You'd almost think different people like different things.

Also, "something better" did not arrive.  Something you personally liked better arrived.  There is a difference.
You should go to GaryCon.  Period.

The rules can\'t cure stupid, and the rules can\'t cure asshole.

Willie the Duck

Quote from: estar;863911That is pure utter nonsense bullshit. The basic point to releasing any RPG material (commercial or not) to have people use it. The numbers tell you how effective your approach was. And it is only measure that is worth having. emphasis added

That's a reasonable opinion, but hardly a universally agreed-upon position.

Quote from: Zevious Zoquis;863913It seems pretty apparent to me based on reading the OP that the point of this poll was to offer an opportunity to "bash" the OSR.

Or the opposite. Or something else entirely. Perhaps just to get a general sense of how relevant it is to the people of the forum. Or if they are simply tired of hearing about it.

Bren

Quote from: estar;863911That is pure utter nonsense bullshit.
Which, oddly enough, you then agreed with in the exact same post.

QuoteWith the above being said, it is useless as measure of a product's value for an individual gamer.
So is it bullshit or isn't it?

I'm familiar with the 20 million Frenchmen argument. To use language you are familiar with, "Bullshit." That's the measure of its economic value. If that's your sole measure of value, then we don't have enough in common in our world views to be able to communicate on the subject of quality or value of a object in any meaningful way. Though you might want to try reading the points 3 + 4 which I included to address economic value.

Quote from: Zevious Zoquis;863913It seems pretty apparent to me based on reading the OP that the point of this poll was to offer an opportunity to "bash" the OSR.  That didn't really happen...at least not in any nearly unanimous way.
I didn't interpret it that way. If you did, that helps explain your defensiveness.

QuoteThe poll was posted on this site.  If the results of the poll posted on this site don't mean anything, why post the poll on this site at all?
Curiosity. An attempt to validate a point of view. Desire to stir controversy. Ignorance of proper sampling and polling. To name just a few possible reasons. The reason why the OP posted it is irrelevant to the conclusions we can reasonably draw from the data. Which aren't much more than X people responded to answer 1, etc.

QuoteIrregardless of that, what it tells us is there are at least 50 or so people who think the OSR stuff is OK.  Since the OSR is a "movement" started by hobbyists for hobbyists, there's no particular reason it needs more of a following than that.
Regardless of the numbers, the OSR doesn't need a following to be of interest to someone. It just needs to be of interest. To someone.

QuoteWhich has nothing to do with anything we are talking about really...
It was intended to help the halfwits who confuse popularity with quality and value. I was trying to separate the concept of popularity from that of quality or value. Since you didn't get it and neither did estar, it failed to universally achieve that aim.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;863918Also, "something better" did not arrive.  Something you personally liked better arrived.  There is a difference.
One that a number of people (see above) repeatedly fail to grasp. In part because "better" is a misleading word to use when applied to individual subjective preferences. I liked Runequest 2 better than AD&D or OD&D, which is why I switched. Obviously you didn't like Runequest better* (or you never did a comparison) so you stayed with a game you liked better.



* I would argue that Runequest 2 had a better presentation than OD&D - easier to read, better formatting, clearer rules explanations, better examples, and better artwork too. But those aren't about a game system being better. Similarly I'd argue that the rules to SPI boardgames were better presented than the vast majority of RPGs, for similar reasons of clarity, formatting, and pertinent examples.
Currently running: Runequest in Glorantha + Call of Cthulhu   Currently playing: D&D 5E + RQ
My Blog: For Honor...and Intrigue
I have a gold medal from Ravenswing and Gronan owes me bee

Gronan of Simmerya

Quote from: Bren;863927I liked Runequest 2 better than AD&D or OD&D, which is why I switched. Obviously you didn't like Runequest better* (or you never did a comparison) so you stayed with a game you liked better.


* I would argue that Runequest 2 had a better presentation than OD&D - easier to read, better formatting, clearer rules explanations, better examples, and better artwork too. But those aren't about a game system being better. Similarly I'd argue that the rules to SPI boardgames were better presented than the vast majority of RPGs, for similar reasons of clarity, formatting, and pertinent examples.

OD&D really had crappy presentation.  But here in 2015 pretty much everybody knows more or less what an RPG is so it doesn't matter as much that it doesn't explain itself well.  I've reached the point of familiarity where all I really need are the attack matrices, the saving throw chart, the undead turning chart, the random monster tables, and my dungeon levels and I'm good.  Familiarity counts for a lot, with any game.

I tried Runequest, didn't like it, but that doesn't mean I think it's a "bad" game, it's just not something I like as well as other games.
You should go to GaryCon.  Period.

The rules can\'t cure stupid, and the rules can\'t cure asshole.

Phillip

Quote from: estar;863911That is pure utter nonsense bullshit. The basic point to releasing any RPG material (commercial or not) to have people use it. The numbers tell you how effective your approach was. And it is only measure that is worth having.
That was poorly put and perhaps poorly considered.

There are in fact people -- including, apparently, you with Majestic Wilderlands -- who find it plenty worth pleasing a subset of people that happens to be smaller than some other set. This is simple to appreciate, since inherently the sum of any combination of Biggest Thing with anything else is greater than BT alone, and maximal diversity actually delivers maximal pleasing of people.
And we are here as on a darkling plain  ~ Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight, ~ Where ignorant armies clash by night.

Bren

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;863945OD&D really had crappy presentation.  But here in 2015 pretty much everybody knows more or less what an RPG is so it doesn't matter as much that it doesn't explain itself well.  I've reached the point of familiarity where all I really need are the attack matrices, the saving throw chart, the undead turning chart, the random monster tables, and my dungeon levels and I'm good.  Familiarity counts for a lot, with any game.
Agreed. I think I had the attack matrix memorized. The saving throw chart always seemed a little quirky as to what was in which column, but I still remember much of the monster table in the beginning of book two even though it's been decades since I've looked at it or played OD&D. After all, it's not like the players needed to know much of the rule book to play. With the exception of my one friend who collected RPGs (but seldom ran any), the only people I know who bought the rules were GMs. Of course that was probably a third of the people I knew who played D&D and half or more of the people who played a lot of D&D.

QuoteI tried Runequest, didn't like it, but that doesn't mean I think it's a "bad" game, it's just not something I like as well as other games.
I'm curious what you didn't like.
Currently running: Runequest in Glorantha + Call of Cthulhu   Currently playing: D&D 5E + RQ
My Blog: For Honor...and Intrigue
I have a gold medal from Ravenswing and Gronan owes me bee

Gronan of Simmerya

#176
With RQ, that's when I started to realize I liked more abstract games.  

EDIT:
For instance I was intrigued at first by the more differentiated armor system; you could have a mail haubergeon and steel plate greaves and studded vambraces and it meant something.  And you had hit locations and etc.

But after a fairly short while the added fun no longer seemed worth the added work.

END EDIT

I now honestly prefer level based games to skill based games as referee because it's easier for me to think in terms of "a third level fighter is third level in anything it seems reasonable for a fighter to do."

I don't mind skill based games quite as much as a player... I'm quite fond of Fantasy Trip, for instance.

But overwhelmingly for me simpler is better, as either player or ref.

Usual mileage disclaimer goes here.
You should go to GaryCon.  Period.

The rules can\'t cure stupid, and the rules can\'t cure asshole.

Bren

#177
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;863954But overwhelmingly for me simpler is better, as either player or ref.
So to summarize, you are more simple minded than me. I can live with that. :p

Teasing aside, that makes sense. I haven't played RQ much in the last 15 years or so, in part due to the complexity. Overall my enthusiasm for greater detail/more complexity/less abstraction has waned over the years. And most of the players who liked that sort of thing aren't around any more.

The big downside to RQ I found was that combat between very skilled, especially Rune-level characters ended up either as a stalemate or (with optional rules) as just too fast and fluky.
Currently running: Runequest in Glorantha + Call of Cthulhu   Currently playing: D&D 5E + RQ
My Blog: For Honor...and Intrigue
I have a gold medal from Ravenswing and Gronan owes me bee

Phillip

I find that OD&D vs 1st-2nd ed. RQ ends up being mostly "six vs half a dozen." For instance, even on the point Gronan specifically mentioned, I've got Arneson's hit location system in Supp. II. I can write "Game Nerd 45%" as easily as "Nth Level Game Nerd" -- and actually the former does not require the additional step of implementation that the latter does!

To me, these are mainly just two languages that can in fact easily be mixed; I use as much or as little of the jargon as I find useful in the case at hand.
And we are here as on a darkling plain  ~ Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight, ~ Where ignorant armies clash by night.

David Johansen

Yeah, numbers in RuneQuest can be a real kicker.  Don't expect your Rune Lord in his rune armor and with his rune sword and his divine magic to be immune to half a dozen punks with sticks.

GURPS is like this too, I remember playing the Conan: Beyond Thunder River solitaire adventure and dying repeatedly to bands of half a dozen Picts.  I did finish it eventually but even at 500 points 150 points of opponents will probably win.  This is actually an artifact of the "free" base score of 10 everyone gets.   A 0 point GURPS character is actually a 600 point GURPS character so really it's 1100 point Conan verses 3700 points of Picts.

Honestly I've always wished GURPS would have hung a bit closer to its original form and not become so bloated.  Just a bit more realistic and detailed than TFT is my sweet spot but no, GURPS became the detail freak's wet dream.  Oh well, I still love it, but I think it could have a much more dominant place in the market with a little tweaking.
Fantasy Adventure Comic, games, and more http://www.uncouthsavage.com