Is the OSR just sword and sorcery games based upon D&D 1e+? Is it about the spirit of the genre of sword and sorcery, not necessarily the rules or the mechanics? Is about being based upon or inspired by the rules even if the subject matter is unrelated? I am curious what you guys think.
I have no idea.
Here is a recent discussion:
https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/osr-a-set-of-rules-or-an-idea/
Quote from: squirewaldo on January 18, 2023, 10:00:20 AM
Is the OSR just sword and sorcery games based upon D&D 1e+? Is it about the spirit of the genre of sword and sorcery, not necessarily the rules or the mechanics? Is about being based upon or inspired by the rules even if the subject matter is unrelated? I am curious what you guys think.
OSR is not specific to Sword & Sorcery. There are few games that model Sword & Sorcery but in general they are more generic high fantasy (Elves, Dwarves, and Orcs, etc). OSR is not specific to 1e+, in fact most are specific to versions prior to AD&D 1e and I believe at least one models 2e (or at least 2e as it would have been with Gygax).
OSR started as inspired by playstyles that started to disappear with 3E. Hopefully rytrasmi's link will clarify.
It started out, as a few old school D&D "authentically-flavored" rulesets. OSRIC, Labyrinth Lord, Swords & Wizardry, etc. Castles & Crusades, and Basic Fantasy were in there too; but they blended a little bit of D&D 3rd Edition into their DNA. I think that was the early history, that led to what we see today. WOTC didn't fight against it, either.
Quote from: squirewaldo on January 18, 2023, 10:00:20 AM
Is the OSR just sword and sorcery games based upon D&D 1e+? Is it about the spirit of the genre of sword and sorcery, not necessarily the rules or the mechanics? Is about being based upon or inspired by the rules even if the subject matter is unrelated? I am curious what you guys think.
It is whatever you want to do with existing d20 SRD content (assuming the OGL survives) when stripped of newer mechanics and adapted in a way that it but a hop and skip from a given classic edition.
For me, it is the system I use to bring my thoughts on sandbox campaigns, and hexcrawl formatted setting to left in order to allow players to "trash" the setting.
Other folks have their own creative priorities. Since we mostly publish using digital technology like print on demand, PDFs, etc. It is a non zero sum situation where we don't have to compete for limited shelf space in stores and warehouses.
Yes, I asked a similar question about the nature of OSR just recently. It's in the 1st reply.
Quote from: Ruprecht on January 18, 2023, 10:29:41 AM
, in fact most are specific to versions prior to AD&D 1e
The majority of OSR games are based off Moldvay/Cook B/X, which was released in 1981, where AD&D 1e was released from 1977 to 79. So the bulk of the OSR sits in the 1977 to 1983 range.
Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 03:28:12 PM
The majority of OSR games are based off Moldvay/Cook B/X, which was released in 1981, where AD&D 1e was released from 1977 to 79. So the bulk of the OSR sits in the 1977 to 1983 range.
You are correct. I was thinking of the LBB and Holmes Basic. But most Basic are based off Moldvay.
A dream to some...a nightmare to others!
Quote from: Philotomy Jurament on January 19, 2023, 08:53:31 AM
A dream to some...a nightmare to others!
You forgot the "/Merlin" at the end...
They're D&D copycat games.
Quote from: weirdguy564 on January 19, 2023, 02:00:36 PM
They're D&D copycat games.
Many are and it's kind of the point of the exercise.
Quote from: weirdguy564 on January 19, 2023, 02:00:36 PM
They're D&D copycat games.
That defines 90% of RPGs ever published!
Quote from: weirdguy564 on January 19, 2023, 02:00:36 PM
They're D&D copycat games.
And some are quite good, too.
Quote from: squirewaldo on January 18, 2023, 10:00:20 AM
Is the OSR just sword and sorcery games based upon D&D 1e+? Is it about the spirit of the genre of sword and sorcery, not necessarily the rules or the mechanics? Is about being based upon or inspired by the rules even if the subject matter is unrelated? I am curious what you guys think.
From a previous thread about the topic, I'll post my response:
QuoteI would say that when it comes to rules, the OSR emulates game systems pre-3E D&D. Most of the OSR material does concentrate on pre-2e D&D though.
Idea or mindset? A similar thread was posted at Dragonsfoot.org. here's my response:
-rulings vs. rules: means in the OS way, if you didn't have a rule for it, you made a ruling at that time and stuck with it. Now? There seems to be a rule for EVERYTHING. Whichever one is better is a personal opinion.
- tables vs. lack thereof: LOTS of tables in OS games, which shows the wargaming connection. I think that's kinda cool. Modern tends to do away with tables mostly, at least when it comes to anything combat related. It's mostly apposing dice rolls or some target number thingy. Again, personal preference. I prefer the former and not the latter
-basic character classes and races vs. everything but the kitchen sink: PCs in the OS were mostly pretty basic as far as skills and abilities. The Core Four (Fighter, Cleric, MU, Thief) didn't have much to them. Even the sub-classes just had a few extra special abilities. It was up to you as the player to make them unique in the game. Give them personality, if you wanted to. Even the races to pick from didn't have too many special skills. Humans didn't have any! Modern has skills, abilities, and races that are greatly influenced by online RPGs. LOTs a skills and abilities, even for the basic classes. I prefer the former. If I want to play a video game, I'll play a video game thankyouverymuch.
which leads to...
-challenging the player vs. challenging the character: with the previously stated about PC classes and races, because of the minimum amount of those skills and abilities, much of the challenges met in OS were to challenge the player of that character: to be creative to get out of a situation, to figure out a riddle or puzzle, etc. Now in Modern, most of it is reduced down to a roll of the dice. Need to negotiate with a group of bandits? Somebody probably has a skill for that. need to figure out a riddle based in the lore of a long lost race? I'm sure a PC has a skill to help out. I think a balance can be made, but I'd rather not leave it down to a die roll every single time. Nor should you keep trying to break the brains of every player at the table. That can get exhausting. I prefer more challenges to me as a player than dice rolls for everything you throw at me. It's the satisfaction of ME overcoming the challenge, not some numbers on a piece of paper and dice rolling.
zeros vs. already heroes: This goes with my 4th point above. PCs in OS started off as "zeroes": nobodies. You had to earn you way up the ladder to be someone. Ability scores were fixed for the most part. In Modern, most PCs has a boat load of special skills and talents. You can even improve ability scores and start way above normal people. You already start as a hero. Now IMO that takes away entirely from the Hero's Journey. If you already have a bunch of cool skills, talents, etc. and already somewhat made a name for yourself, then what is the point? IMO, the intrinsic value of the PC earning the fame, fortune, and power along the way is much more interesting than a PC that already has some of that from the get go.
That's just my opinion. YMMV.
At this point the OSR is more of a marketing piece than an actual movement. I have no data to back this up, but it feels like the expansion period has stalled. I don't think it will die, I just think the growth is over. I think we'll look back to the moment Google+ shut down as the half-life.
Quote from: FingerRod on January 20, 2023, 07:53:21 AM
At this point the OSR is more of a marketing piece than an actual movement. I have no data to back this up, but it feels like the expansion period has stalled. I don't think it will die, I just think the growth is over. I think we'll look back to the moment Google+ shut down as the half-life.
I disagree.
To say the OSR is a "marketing piece" is conjecture. If anything, since WoTC has dropped the ball on the OGL, the OSR will probably get more players and DMs. How many would be purely speculative. But I guarantee there is fallout from the WoTC debacle, and the OSR will benefit some.
A movement is never dead as long as at least one person in involved.
Quote from: blackstone on January 20, 2023, 08:17:25 AM
Quote from: FingerRod on January 20, 2023, 07:53:21 AM
At this point the OSR is more of a marketing piece than an actual movement. I have no data to back this up, but it feels like the expansion period has stalled. I don't think it will die, I just think the growth is over. I think we'll look back to the moment Google+ shut down as the half-life.
I disagree.
To say the OSR is a "marketing piece" is conjecture. If anything, since WoTC has dropped the ball on the OGL, the OSR will probably get more players and DMs. How many would be purely speculative. But I guarantee there is fallout from the WoTC debacle, and the OSR will benefit some.
A movement is never dead as long as at least one person in involved.
But how much will the OSR continue to feel like the OSR when much of the foundational lore will need to change to not run afoul of Hasbro/WotC/TSR copyrights?
You can have elves, but they need to be distinct from D&D elves (see Palladium Books variant vs. D&D's wood, gray, dark, wild, sun, moon, etc. variants).
You can have a magic-user, but something from the list of Vancian prep, level-based slot casting, and the specific list of spells will have to be changed (Palladium Fantasy 1e dropped the Vancian, made the slots level independent, had its own spell list and renamed magic-user to wizard).
And unless the independents of the OSR put their heads together on a common standard then each branch of the OSR will make different choices for what parts of the concept stack can be changed to keep what they feel is critical to the combined concept... and that will reduce the easy compatibility between versions they've enjoyed.
It will be like trying to use an element from Palladium Fantasy in a Tunnels & Trolls game. Sure, a GM can convert the element, but it's no longer plug&play and so inherently less useful.
And even if the OSR does pull together for a unified standard for interoperability, what happens when the part of D&D you most valued was the thing chopped in order to have a different enough concept stack from WotC's copyright?
I think one of the reasons so many are piling onto ORC is the belief that somehow this magic license can allow all their favorite settings to continue on just as they were before the reveal of the OGL1.1 nuke.
What only a few from my reading really understand right now (stages of grief are real and everyone processes at their own pace) is that the nukes have already been dropped on the ttrpg industry and we're living in the post apocalyptic world where the global hegemon is off the table and the previous mid-tier powers are striving to maintain some degree of control over their areas and exploit the vacuum. The only survivors are going to be those already so different as to be immune to the fallout and mutations of the systems that previously relied on OGL/SRD material.
Quote from: Chris24601 on January 20, 2023, 08:58:34 AM
Quote from: blackstone on January 20, 2023, 08:17:25 AM
Quote from: FingerRod on January 20, 2023, 07:53:21 AM
At this point the OSR is more of a marketing piece than an actual movement. I have no data to back this up, but it feels like the expansion period has stalled. I don't think it will die, I just think the growth is over. I think we'll look back to the moment Google+ shut down as the half-life.
I disagree.
To say the OSR is a "marketing piece" is conjecture. If anything, since WoTC has dropped the ball on the OGL, the OSR will probably get more players and DMs. How many would be purely speculative. But I guarantee there is fallout from the WoTC debacle, and the OSR will benefit some.
A movement is never dead as long as at least one person in involved.
But how much will the OSR continue to feel like the OSR when much of the foundational lore will need to change to not run afoul of Hasbro/WotC/TSR copyrights?
You can have elves, but they need to be distinct from D&D elves (see Palladium Books variant vs. D&D's wood, gray, dark, wild, sun, moon, etc. variants).
You can have a magic-user, but something from the list of Vancian prep, level-based slot casting, and the specific list of spells will have to be changed (Palladium Fantasy 1e dropped the Vancian, made the slots level independent, had its own spell list and renamed magic-user to wizard).
And unless the independents of the OSR put their heads together on a common standard then each branch of the OSR will make different choices for what parts of the concept stack can be changed to keep what they feel is critical to the combined concept... and that will reduce the easy compatibility between versions they've enjoyed.
It will be like trying to use an element from Palladium Fantasy in a Tunnels & Trolls game. Sure, a GM can convert the element, but it's no longer plug&play and so inherently less useful.
And even if the OSR does pull together for a unified standard for interoperability, what happens when the part of D&D you most valued was the thing chopped in order to have a different enough concept stack from WotC's copyright?
I think one of the reasons so many are piling onto ORC is the belief that somehow this magic license can allow all their favorite settings to continue on just as they were before the reveal of the OGL1.1 nuke.
What only a few from my reading really understand right now (stages of grief are real and everyone processes at their own pace) is that the nukes have already been dropped on the ttrpg industry and we're living in the post apocalyptic world where the global hegemon is off the table and the previous mid-tier powers are striving to maintain some degree of control over their areas and exploit the vacuum. The only survivors are going to be those already so different as to be immune to the fallout and mutations of the systems that previously relied on OGL/SRD material.
Honestly, you need to educate yourself more on the recent developments. One of the cool developments is according to most lawyers who have looked into this is since the original OGL was written for D&D 3.0, earlier versions of the game don't even need it. Even if it wasn't the case, WoTC's version of 1.2 states that any existing product that uses 1.0a can still be published under that license. Also, you cannot copyright game mechanics. This was ruled on years ago by US courts. Dude, calm down. You're acting like WoTC is going to come down and take the books right out of your house. The OSR will survive. Everyone in the OSR are savvy enough to know how to keep their products going and continue for them to be backward compatible.
Remember that WoTC was the one doing the back-peddling on this. they knew they fucked up, and now they're playing damage control. But the genie is out of the bottle. NOBODY trusts them and NOBODY is afraid of them. The can't tell you how to play. They can't tell you what to play. The only way they have power over any of the gaming community is if we allow them to. So tell them to go "Fuck off"!
Quote from: blackstone on January 20, 2023, 02:06:47 PM
Honestly, you need to educate yourself more on the recent developments. One of the cool developments is according to most lawyers who have looked into this is since the original OGL was written for D&D 3.0, earlier versions of the game don't even need it. Even if it wasn't the case, WoTC's version of 1.2 states that any existing product that uses 1.0a can still be published under that license. Also, you cannot copyright game mechanics. This was ruled on years ago by US courts. Dude, calm down. You're acting like WoTC is going to come down and take the books right out of your house. The OSR will survive. Everyone in the OSR are savvy enough to know how to keep their products going and continue for them to be backward compatible.
WotC isn't backpedaling, they're just getting sneakier.
For example, that's NOT what the OGL1.2 says about existing products using the 1.0a license... but they'd like you to think it is.
"Published" in copyright law has a specific meaning. It refers to a specific printing/publication/distribution of a work. The first printing of a book is one publishing of the book. The second printing is a separate publishing of the book.
"Previously Published Works" in a legal sense means "copies of the work you already have sitting in your warehouse." It does not mean every future printing or distribution of the work.
If WotC intended the 1.0a to be useable in perpetuity for all things created prior to the launch of OGL1.2 they would use "previously created works" and not "previously published works."
* * * *
Most of those lawyers aren't copyright lawyers who understand the concept of specific collections of concepts used in conjunction add up to copyright infringement. They're probably looking at the "can't copyright mechanics clause" and forgetting that "can copyright specific expressions" part.
There's a reason every Superman expy in comics has at least one (if not several) distinct differences from the actual Superman concept... and once upon a time that stack was enough that for all his differences Captain Marvel (the Shazam version) ran afoul of it (a different judge and jury may have found differently, but all that matters is the judge and jury YOU get and "but a different judge/jury might have decided it differently is cold comfort as you are forced to destroy your back stock and cease all future publications of that work).
I don't feel like repeating my Cleric example again, but its out there in plenty of other threads about the OGL stuff now so go look it up... its relevant and probably the easiest way for Hasbro to go after their competitors and the things that if changed will result in the bigger changes in feel and play.
Quote from: blackstone on January 20, 2023, 08:17:25 AM
Quote from: FingerRod on January 20, 2023, 07:53:21 AM
At this point the OSR is more of a marketing piece than an actual movement. I have no data to back this up, but it feels like the expansion period has stalled. I don't think it will die, I just think the growth is over. I think we'll look back to the moment Google+ shut down as the half-life.
A movement is never dead as long as at least one person in involved.
Whatever you say, el Che. One person is about the same number to have subbed on /OSR over the last 18 months. So, yes, I guess the movement is thriving.
Quote from: Chris24601 on January 20, 2023, 08:58:34 AM
But how much will the OSR continue to feel like the OSR when much of the foundational lore will need to change to not run afoul of Hasbro/WotC/TSR copyrights?
You can have elves, but they need to be distinct from D&D elves (see Palladium Books variant vs. D&D's wood, gray, dark, wild, sun, moon, etc. variants).
This isn't a real problem. Change elves to maturing at the same rate as humans, so an adult elf is 20 years old, but a 100 year old elf isn't on death's door. This also fixes the weird problem of why is a 120 year old elf with all that experience still a 1st level character? Drop immunity to ghoul paralysis. That was odd anyway. There's no need for all the variants unless there is a mechanical difference. And if you want to make variants, just draw on Tolkien, or some other property.
Quote
You can have a magic-user, but something from the list of Vancian prep, level-based slot casting, and the specific list of spells will have to be changed (Palladium Fantasy 1e dropped the Vancian, made the slots level independent, had its own spell list and renamed magic-user to wizard).
This also isn't a problem, more people dislike Vancian casting than like it. (I'm odd for actually liking it). Changing the magic system is the first thing anyone does when making a Fantasy Heartbreaker.
Quote
And unless the independents of the OSR put their heads together on a common standard then each branch of the OSR will make different choices for what parts of the concept stack can be changed to keep what they feel is critical to the combined concept... and that will reduce the easy compatibility between versions they've enjoyed.
Stuff like races is also going to be setting dependent. Do up your setting, describe how they are in the setting. The only thing that really needs to be standard is humans, and that's easy.
Quote
It will be like trying to use an element from Palladium Fantasy in a Tunnels & Trolls game. Sure, a GM can convert the element, but it's no longer plug&play and so inherently less useful.
You can take an element from Palladium Fantasy and put it into AD&D though. In fact I did that back in high school before I knew it was a separate system.
Quote
And even if the OSR does pull together for a unified standard for interoperability, what happens when the part of D&D you most valued was the thing chopped in order to have a different enough concept stack from WotC's copyright?
This would be the point of a new license like ORC. One designer puts out the rules, licenses it. WotC has to go after the original designer. So if you think you can get something as close as it needs to be, and you think you can fight WotC in court, you can do it.
There's also the reality that WotC is most afraid of Paizo, and probably going forward Kobold Press. That's where the battle will be fought first. WotC isn't going to go after Stuart Marshall or Gavin Normal while they have bigger fish to fry.
Quote
I think one of the reasons so many are piling onto ORC is the belief that somehow this magic license can allow all their favorite settings to continue on just as they were before the reveal of the OGL1.1 nuke.
Yeah, it does seem that there is a misconception of what ORC is, just like there has long been a misconception of what OGL is. But there has also long been a misconception of what is actually necessary. You don't need the OGL to make a game that is like D&D.
OSE uses B/X attack matrixes. That's stupid. Smoothed out attack progression is better. There's a change to make it distinctly different, and everyone is happier with it.
Quote
What only a few from my reading really understand right now (stages of grief are real and everyone processes at their own pace) is that the nukes have already been dropped on the ttrpg industry and we're living in the post apocalyptic world where the global hegemon is off the table and the previous mid-tier powers are striving to maintain some degree of control over their areas and exploit the vacuum. The only survivors are going to be those already so different as to be immune to the fallout and mutations of the systems that previously relied on OGL/SRD material.
This is being melodramatic. But I guess you're also processing your grief at your own pace.