OSR vs. TSR

RPGPundit · February 03, 2013, 11:19:46 AM

James Raggi has been quoted as saying that the OSR is now better than "TSR", which I take to mean he's saying that the stuff the OSR does now is better than the games and modules TSR put out in the real old-school days.

Do you agree?

RPGPundit

Melan · February 03, 2013, 11:23:33 AM

Yes, but not better than the best of Judges Guild.

RandallS · February 03, 2013, 11:25:59 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;624431James Raggi has been quoted as saying that the OSR is now better than "TSR", which I take to mean he's saying that the stuff the OSR does now is better than the games and modules TSR put out in the real old-school days.

The claim seems silly to me. Some OSR stuff certainly is better than some of the stuff TSR published. Some of it certainly isn't better than most of the stuff TSR put out. The material put out by both is/was quite variable in quality.

Note: Even the worst OSR stuff often has better production values than early TSR stuff, but that's simply a function of low cost word processing/DTP software that is far better than anything early TSR had access to until they hit the "big time". However, as I don't measure the usefulness/"betterness" of game material by production values, I don't count this.

ggroy · February 03, 2013, 11:26:51 AM

Did 2E AD&D produce any outstanding modules?

VectorSigma · February 03, 2013, 11:27:50 AM

It shouldn't be surprising if several hundred people who all write stuff going in different directions manage to produce stuff that's more intriguing to any given observer than two dozen people writing stuff within limitations given them by management.

I mean, volume alone makes a difference.

estar · February 03, 2013, 11:29:46 AM

I don't think anybody will dispute that in general a classic product will be made. The fly in the ointment is that this type of judgement really only works given time. Check back in a decade and we will find the which OSR products stand with the older classics.

I will say that overall it has been a second golden age for older edtion D&D. Since 2000 there has been over 700 publications targeting an older edition of D&D. That the total combined output and variety is exceeding the original run of products.

ggroy · February 03, 2013, 11:31:15 AM

Quote from: VectorSigma;624437It shouldn't be surprising if several hundred people who all write stuff going in different directions manage to produce stuff that's more intriguing to any given observer than two dozen people writing stuff within limitations given them by management.

I mean, volume alone makes a difference.

For sure. A numbers game.

One can also see this in the tie-in novels niche, such as the numerous Star Wars, Star Trek, Forgotten Realms, Warhammer, etc ... novels published every year.

Black Vulmea · February 03, 2013, 11:39:46 AM

Does the OSR have its Giants-series? Does it have its Tomb of Horrors? Its White Plume Mountain?

About the only module that really stands out to me as 'iconic as a TSR module' is ASE1, the OSR's Expedition to the Barrier Peaks.

From what I've seen, the OSR has done a credible, competent job of turning out Sinister Secrets of Saltmarshes and Lost Caverns of Tsojcanths - The Pod-Caverns of the Sinister Shroom is probably the most recognizable of the lot.

It's also turned out its fair share of Forest Oracles.

Melan · February 03, 2013, 11:45:21 AM

Quote from: ggroy;624436Did 2E AD&D produce any outstanding modules?

Does Dungeon Magazine count? If it does, it did.

K Peterson · February 03, 2013, 11:46:16 AM

I think a lot of laudable product has come out of the OSR - mainly modules/adventures. Some of which could definitely compete with modules of olde. But when the entire framework for the rules-core of your OSR RPG is a TSR-created system, can you really claim superiority over TSR?

Retroclones serve as a nice launching pad for publishing purposes. But, I see very few OSR RPGs that offer up much that improves upon the TSR D&D experience (... except perhaps DCC, or some of the Sine Nomine stuff).

estar · February 03, 2013, 11:47:53 AM

Quote from: Black Vulmea;624441Does the OSR have its Giants-series? Does it have its Tomb of Horrors? Its White Plume Mountain?

I don't know you tell me.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0Ar9Wm_5gI_1TdGlyZHpwRHFoU2pEMng0NkhqTlJEYmc&type=view&gid=0&f=true&colid0=1&filterstr0=module&sortcolid=-1&sortasc=true&rowsperpage=250

The list of modules from Hoard and Horde.

I gave to say that Raggi's modules are pretty unique, whether are they iconic we will have to check back in a few years. I agree ASE1 is a good candidate for iconic status.

estar · February 03, 2013, 11:49:29 AM

Quote from: K Peterson;624446I think a lot of laudable product has come out of the OSR - mainly modules/adventures. Some of which could definitely compete with modules of olde. But when the entire framework for the rules-core of your OSR RPG is a TSR-created system, can you really claim superiority over TSR?

Yes, just as the Renaissance learned classical techniques and took them in new directions. Also superiority wouldn't be how I would describe the process. It is more of an expansion of options and variety.

VectorSigma · February 03, 2013, 11:52:00 AM

Quote from: Black Vulmea;624441Does the OSR have its Giants-series? Does it have its Tomb of Horrors? Its White Plume Mountain?

It doesn't, and I don't think it will.

We all played those classic modules back in the day; there isn't a shared experience like that now, at least not within the same time-frame.

When we all watch 'The Fugitive' every week and talk about it the next day, that's Against The Giants in the early 80s. When you watch 'BSG' live and I watch it on Netflix ten years later...well, we can still chat about the show, but it's not the same thing, is it?

I dunno, maybe the analogy doesn't work. But the point is that I don't think there has been any "must-play" adventure to become that shared experience.

K Peterson · February 03, 2013, 11:55:19 AM

Quote from: estar;624448Yes, just as the Renaissance learned classical techniques and took them in new directions.

I just don't feel that the vast majority of Retroclones out there have taken techniques far enough to be that revolutionary. A smattering of houserules that tweak a recognized core is not an improvement, necessarily, over that recognized core.

K Peterson · February 03, 2013, 11:57:43 AM

Quote from: estar;624448Also superiority wouldn't be how I would describe the process. It is more of an expansion of options and variety.

Well, I'm making reference to Raggi's alleged comments about being "better than", and substituting "superior to".