I'm interested in approaches for sim/sandbox/OSR style games that aren't tied to the traditional D&D 4 man party structure (Fighter, MU, Thief, Cleric). This was prompted by a question on Facebook that a couple asked about games that a couple could reasonably play.

RuneQuest strikes me as a sandbox/sim game that bypasses the entire class structure (all PCs have low-power magic spells and heal themselves via 1st aid, potions and low-power magic).

I'm thinking that most OSR clone set ups that allow humans to multiclass in the same manner as demi-humans could do it. However, I understand that this isn't common and some folks object to multi-classing on principle.

I'm also aware of Scarlet Heroes, which supposedly allows for 1 player, 1 GM style play.

I'm more interested in games which bypass or amend the class structure, or somehow keep it but make other provisions, as opposed to using stuff like NPCs or potions to account for healing and magic.

Are you strictly limiting yourself to OSR games?

Not strictly. I asked because this forum is something of an outpost for OSR thought. But I think that asking if an OSR game requires the traditional class structure is a good one. Perhaps this should be seperated from "what are good 1 or 2 player RPGs."

As far as I know, no.  "Party of a certain size" - yeah, probably.  But "one of each class"?  I don't recall it being played that way when we were kids.  More like, "Oh cool, I can be an elf!"

Yeah, the party recommendations IIRC were generally 50% fighters, 50% everyone else. The 4-man party idea came about later.

If you want a game like Runequest, why not play Runequest (or it's superior brother Stormbringer)?

We did a lot of solo play... solo as in "PC only."  So, no.

The four types are always handy to have, but not "necessary."

Just a cleric IME. The gameplay changes significantly without one.

Nah, you don't need all four types.

I would never say "needs".  It is up to the DM to decide what happens to a party of all magic-users, or all fighters, or fighters and magic users and a fighter/thief, etc.

IIRC, at one point a test was done with a dungeon and a party that consisted of all of one type of character.

The clerics did the best, by *far*.  They're pretty amazingly self-sufficient in D&D.

While it's not everyone's cup of tea, Fate is definitely workable for one-on-one games, as there's no real subsystems that 'require' any particular role, skills, or even substitutes (like healing potions).  And like most skill-based systems, it bypasses any kind of class structure.

Quote from: Kaiu Keiichi;747497I'm interested in approaches for sim/sandbox/OSR style games that aren't tied to the traditional D&D 4 man party structure (Fighter, MU, Thief, Cleric).

With TSR D&D have had anywhere from 1 to over 20 players playing at the same time. (Fortunately, generally less than 10). I've never had any issues with party size or makeup. However, I do not run pre-written modules where there is less flexibility than in one of my sandbox settings.

Most TSR D&D like OSR games should be about the same. I know my Microlite74 and Microlite81 are.

Quote from: hedgehobbit;747538Yeah, the party recommendations IIRC were generally 50% fighters, 50% everyone else. The 4-man party idea came about later.

If you want a game like Runequest, why not play Runequest (or it's superior brother Stormbringer)?

I might! I wanted to get views from the folks who know retrogames better than I do. I consider RQ and BRP from that era to also be OSR, but that's my view that may not be shared by some. Original RQ2, for example, was the very definition of 3 HP and a Sleep spell (or, in the Pavis rubble, a Disrupt spell and 2 point leather armor.)

Scarlet Heroes is designed for 1 GM and 1-2 players. The free Quickstart is very well done (it allows you to play with Lv1 characters, and it has anything you need to play).

Quote from: robiswrong;747549IIRC, at one point a test was done with a dungeon and a party that consisted of all of one type of character.

The clerics did the best, by *far*.  They're pretty amazingly self-sufficient in D&D.

The original D&D cleric is a genuine badass.

O/AD&D itself works darn well for non-standard groups. In fact thats the norm for my experience and F/C/T/MU groups were rare. We often lacked a cleric in the group and sometimes didnt have a straight up fighter either.

Though one of my longest current local AD&D campaigns now had just a pair of fighters, well, a Paladin and a Kensai. With occasional walk ins of a pair of Thieves who didnt last to the 1/3rd mark due to moving.