Traveller.

Update on Astonishing Swordsmen and Sorcerers of Hyperborea, for those interested. I emailed with the writer/owner and he said that he is working on a new printing for the first half of next year. He isn't quite calling it a new "edition," but is unsure. It will have new cover art, an index, and he may split it into two volumes.

Also, he's working on a City State of Khromarium product and a megadungeon. Sounds terrific.

Quote from: Mercurius on October 07, 2020, 07:09:49 PM
Update on Astonishing Swordsmen and Sorcerers of Hyperborea, for those interested. I emailed with the writer/owner and he said that he is working on a new printing for the first half of next year. He isn't quite calling it a new "edition," but is unsure. It will have new cover art, an index, and he may split it into two volumes.

Also, he's working on a City State of Khromarium product and a megadungeon. Sounds terrific.

Very cool! Thanks for checking.

Quote from: Nerzenjäger on October 07, 2020, 08:24:38 AM

Quote from: DocJones on October 05, 2020, 02:02:00 PM
What?  DCC is isn't even close to D&D 3.5.

You didn't know that DCC is based off 3.5? Where do you think the saves come from?

Yeah, it's 3.5 with race-as-class and universal d20+modifiers vs. difficulty class, and without skill points, feats, opportunity attacks, 5-foot steps, prestige classes, and multi-classing.
Actually, it feels closer to 3.0 plus the same things from above.

Quote from: YnasMidgard on October 08, 2020, 06:59:30 AM

Quote from: Nerzenjäger on October 07, 2020, 08:24:38 AM

Quote from: DocJones on October 05, 2020, 02:02:00 PM
What?  DCC is isn't even close to D&D 3.5.

You didn't know that DCC is based off 3.5? Where do you think the saves come from?

Yeah, it's 3.5 with race-as-class and universal d20+modifiers vs. difficulty class, and without skill points, feats, opportunity attacks, 5-foot steps, prestige classes, and multi-classing.
Actually, it feels closer to 3.0 plus the same things from above.

Yes. Point stands. Basic Fantasy is another great example.

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on October 07, 2020, 08:31:49 AM
Traveller.

Not sure what this comment was in response to, but Traveller is a good counter example. Despite their being at least 7 version of that game, there is no equivalent to the OSR. People use products from all those versions interchangeably and there is no version purity tests (at least that I can see)

For me this just shows that the OSR isn't really needed nor is it helping.

Inside the OSR, people mostly play D&D
Outside the OSR, people mostly play D&D

Quote from: Mercurius on October 04, 2020, 06:26:52 PM
I've generally mostly played the current edition of D&D, whatever it is--from AD&D back in the early 80s to 5E in recent years--so never really dived deep into the OSR, beyond a peripheral awareness of what came out. But for a variety of reasons, my curiosity has recently been piqued. I've been doing a bit of research, but thought I'd evoke the erudition of the grognards here: What is the current state of the OSR (to the degree that it can be envisioned as a distinct movement/group of games)? Which games have separated themselves from the pack and which are dead and gone? How much did the overall positive reception of 5E effect the OSR? Etc. Pretty much any relevant meta-discussion of the OSR is what I'm looking for.

And, in your view, which is the "best" of the OSR games and products? Which is your favorite and why?

For reference, I've included a list of some of the major OSR releases. I've taken liberties by adding a few borderline cases, or those that have an "old school feel" but aren't properly retro-clones of previous editions of D&D, like Forbidden Lands and Conan. Thus "OSR+." But it is my thread, so whatever.

Anyhow, I partially include these non-OSR old school games because I think the timeline illustrates the view that not much new is coming out in recent years; most old schoolish games released in the last half decade or more aren't actually retro-clones, but diverge a bit.

That said, the big retro-clones still seem to have solid fan-bases, perhaps culminating in Hyperborea (which is one of the ones I hope to pick up, at least when the new revised printing is out in 2021), which in my limited knowledge almost seems like the crown jewel of the OSR. Some publishers are still churning out books, while others are relegated to a small group of diehards.

So, commence discussion...

OSR+ Major Releases (Partial List)
2001 Hackmaster
2004 Castles & Crusades
2006 OSRIC; Basic Fantasy
2007 Labyrinth Lord
2009 Swords & Wizardry; Lamentation of the Flame Princess; Barbarians of Lemuria
2010 Dark Dungeons
2011 Mazes & Perils
2012 For Gold & Glory; Dungeon Crawl Classics
2013 Blueholme; Dungeon World; OD&D Deluxe (reprint of 1974 box); Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea
2014 Adventurer, Conquerer, King
2017 Zweihander; Conan: Adventures in an Age Undreamed Of; Lion & Dragon
2018 Forbidden Lands
2020 Old School Essentials

Thanks for including ACKS. However, you've misplaced it in the timeline. ACKS was Kickstarted in 2011 and books shipped April 2012. It preceded ASS&H and DW to market by a year.
See crowdfunding campaign here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/autarch/adventurer-conqueror-king/posts/206605

Quote from: amacris on October 08, 2020, 08:53:52 PM
Thanks for including ACKS. However, you've misplaced it in the timeline. ACKS was Kickstarted in 2011 and books shipped April 2012. It preceded ASS&H and DW to market by a year.
See crowdfunding campaign here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/autarch/adventurer-conqueror-king/posts/206605

Fixed. I put it in 2012.

Quote from: Mercurius on October 08, 2020, 11:39:02 PM

Quote from: amacris on October 08, 2020, 08:53:52 PM
Thanks for including ACKS. However, you've misplaced it in the timeline. ACKS was Kickstarted in 2011 and books shipped April 2012. It preceded ASS&H and DW to market by a year.
See crowdfunding campaign here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/autarch/adventurer-conqueror-king/posts/206605

Fixed. I put it in 2012.

For what it's worth, the AS&SH 1E box sets from the KS that funded Jan 2012 shipped in summer 2012. My copy arrived July 30, 2012.

Quote from: Chainsaw on October 09, 2020, 07:26:27 AM

Quote from: Mercurius on October 08, 2020, 11:39:02 PM

Quote from: amacris on October 08, 2020, 08:53:52 PM
Thanks for including ACKS. However, you've misplaced it in the timeline. ACKS was Kickstarted in 2011 and books shipped April 2012. It preceded ASS&H and DW to market by a year.
See crowdfunding campaign here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/autarch/adventurer-conqueror-king/posts/206605

Fixed. I put it in 2012.

For what it's worth, the AS&SH 1E box sets from the KS that funded Jan 2012 shipped in summer 2012. My copy arrived July 30, 2012.

Man do I love that box set. One of my favorite RPG purchases so far.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on October 08, 2020, 03:37:23 PM

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on October 07, 2020, 08:31:49 AM
Traveller.

Not sure what this comment was in response to, but Traveller is a good counter example. Despite their being at least 7 version of that game, there is no equivalent to the OSR. People use products from all those versions interchangeably and there is no version purity tests (at least that I can see)

For me this just shows that the OSR isn't really needed nor is it helping.

Your statement about there not being a "Traveller OSR" is correct, but if your takeaway from that is that the OSR wasn't/isn't needed, then I guess you just don't really know the basics of why the OSR came to be in the first place.

After TSR was driven into the ground, it was bought and the D&D brand revived with the so-called "3rd edition" by WotC. 3E and subsequent editions, however, were a marked departure from earlier versions of the game. One way of describing the difference would be to say that they catered to and encouraged a different playstyle with different emphases and a different playing culture. Another way would be that WotC's editions were/are shit (with the note that 5E is arguably less shit than 3E/3.5/4E, not that it's saying much). To add insult to injury, WotC's marketing strategy and the online gaming culture cultivated on their forums and elsewhere in the "RPG mainstream" were downright hostile to players who preferred older editions of the game and their own distinctive style. Also, adventures and other material for older edition was not very interchangable with new shit edition stuff, neither in terms of rules nor in terms of playstyle and play assumptions. The OSR came into existence as a direct pushback against that hostility and the lack of availability of old-editions materials.

So when you say that the OSR is pointless, you're essentially stating that you'd be perfectly fine with fans of old editions and old-school playstyle not having a way to easily play (or, very importantly, commercially create material for) their preferred versions of the game. Of course, you're entitled to your own opinion, but if that what you honestly believe, then, speaking as a fan of old-school D&D, fuck you.

As for why Traveller, RuneQuest or any other RPG fans didn't have their own equivalent of or try to co-opt the OSR, it's because they never needed to. AFAIK, they never had a decade when the only easily available editions of their game were the shit ones, so they didn't need to recreate the "good old versions" by their own hands. There are no revolutions where there are no problems.

QuoteInside the OSR, people mostly play D&D
Outside the OSR, people mostly play D&D

What you fail to see is that the D&D played inside the OSR and the D&D played outside the OSR are two completely different things.

Quote from: Premier on October 09, 2020, 05:17:58 PM

Quote from: hedgehobbit on October 08, 2020, 03:37:23 PM

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on October 07, 2020, 08:31:49 AM
Traveller.

Not sure what this comment was in response to, but Traveller is a good counter example. Despite their being at least 7 version of that game, there is no equivalent to the OSR. People use products from all those versions interchangeably and there is no version purity tests (at least that I can see)

For me this just shows that the OSR isn't really needed nor is it helping.

Your statement about there not being a "Traveller OSR" is correct, but if your takeaway from that is that the OSR wasn't/isn't needed, then I guess you just don't really know the basics of why the OSR came to be in the first place.

After TSR was driven into the ground, it was bought and the D&D brand revived with the so-called "3rd edition" by WotC. 3E and subsequent editions, however, were a marked departure from earlier versions of the game. One way of describing the difference would be to say that they catered to and encouraged a different playstyle with different emphases and a different playing culture. Another way would be that WotC's editions were/are shit (with the note that 5E is arguably less shit than 3E/3.5/4E, not that it's saying much). To add insult to injury, WotC's marketing strategy and the online gaming culture cultivated on their forums and elsewhere in the "RPG mainstream" were downright hostile to players who preferred older editions of the game and their own distinctive style. Also, adventures and other material for older edition was not very interchangable with new shit edition stuff, neither in terms of rules nor in terms of playstyle and play assumptions. The OSR came into existence as a direct pushback against that hostility and the lack of availability of old-editions materials.

So when you say that the OSR is pointless, you're essentially stating that you'd be perfectly fine with fans of old editions and old-school playstyle not having a way to easily play (or, very importantly, commercially create material for) their preferred versions of the game. Of course, you're entitled to your own opinion, but if that what you honestly believe, then, speaking as a fan of old-school D&D, fuck you.

As for why Traveller, RuneQuest or any other RPG fans didn't have their own equivalent of or try to co-opt the OSR, it's because they never needed to. AFAIK, they never had a decade when the only easily available editions of their game were the shit ones, so they didn't need to recreate the "good old versions" by their own hands. There are no revolutions where there are no problems.

QuoteInside the OSR, people mostly play D&D
Outside the OSR, people mostly play D&D

What you fail to see is that the D&D played inside the OSR and the D&D played outside the OSR are two completely different things.

Damn, that's a lot crap Hedgehobbit is apparently responsible for, for a guy who barely gave any reason for saying what he said. Way to show the lack of hostility of the OSR! What a loaded diatribe, LOL 

Quote from: VisionStorm on October 09, 2020, 07:11:36 PMDamn, that's a lot crap Hedgehobbit is apparently responsible for, for a guy who barely gave any reason for saying what he said. Way to show the lack of hostility of the OSR! What a loaded diatribe, LOL 

Quote the exact sentence where I said or implied that Hedgehobbit is "responsible for" anything.

Also, if someone tells you that something you like is pointless, especially when he does it, in your own words, "barely giving any reason for saying what he said", a perfunctory "fuck you" is not "hostility", it's the normal, reasonable reply.

Quote from: Premier on October 09, 2020, 05:17:58 PM
What you fail to see is that the D&D played inside the OSR and the D&D played outside the OSR are two completely different things.

Even accounting for the likelihood that your statement was intentionally exaggerated, this is not really true. D&D is played in a wide range of ways, and it isn't either/or (e.g. either old school or not). Many of us don't care about such labels and just play the game in a way that we find pleasing.

Quote from: Premier on October 09, 2020, 07:24:07 PM

Quote from: VisionStorm on October 09, 2020, 07:11:36 PMDamn, that's a lot crap Hedgehobbit is apparently responsible for, for a guy who barely gave any reason for saying what he said. Way to show the lack of hostility of the OSR! What a loaded diatribe, LOL 

Quote the exact sentence where I said or implied that Hedgehobbit is "responsible for" anything.

Also, if someone tells you that something you like is pointless, especially when he does it, in your own words, "barely giving any reason for saying what he said", a perfunctory "fuck you" is not "hostility", it's the normal, reasonable reply.

First, you're couching your entire diatribe under a series of claims that are themselves debatable—inserting your opinions about WotC era editions of D&D (which have better task resolution than old D&D*) and making accusations about the "RPG Mainstream" being hostile to "players who preferred older editions of the game", which pretty much describes my ENITRE experience of the so-called D&D edition wars going back decades before 3e was even released (and usually coming from people OBSESSED with Basic D&D against anyone who played later editions, including AD&D, which have always being "shit" despite being more fleshed out than Basic D&D). And implying that old school players were somehow the victims of some type of persecution that necessitated a "direct pushback against that hostility", making it a loaded statement, which paints anyone on the other side of this discussion as some kind of monster in favor of persecuting people from playing the games they like.

*see how loaded statements work 

Quote from: Premier on October 09, 2020, 05:17:58 PM
After TSR was driven into the ground, it was bought and the D&D brand revived with the so-called "3rd edition" by WotC. 3E and subsequent editions, however, were a marked departure from earlier versions of the game. One way of describing the difference would be to say that they catered to and encouraged a different playstyle with different emphases and a different playing culture. Another way would be that WotC's editions were/are shit (with the note that 5E is arguably less shit than 3E/3.5/4E, not that it's saying much). To add insult to injury, WotC's marketing strategy and the online gaming culture cultivated on their forums and elsewhere in the "RPG mainstream" were downright hostile to players who preferred older editions of the game and their own distinctive style. Also, adventures and other material for older edition was not very interchangable with new shit edition stuff, neither in terms of rules nor in terms of playstyle and play assumptions. The OSR came into existence as a direct pushback against that hostility and the lack of availability of old-editions materials.

Then you claim that by Hedgehobbit merely saying that the OSR is pointless (which it kinda is, TBH. I mean, old D&D is SHIT ) that he's somehow enabling this or stoping fans of old editions or old-school playstyles from having an "easy" way to play games, which are technically still available.

Quote from: Premier on October 09, 2020, 05:17:58 PMSo when you say that the OSR is pointless, you're essentially stating that you'd be perfectly fine with fans of old editions and old-school playstyle not having a way to easily play (or, very importantly, commercially create material for) their preferred versions of the game. Of course, you're entitled to your own opinion, but if that what you honestly believe, then, speaking as a fan of old-school D&D, fuck you.