I unabashedly love OSR stuff, and I enjoy lots about the OSR community as a whole. However, any design movement, advertising platform or mindless cult of zombies has its downsides as well and I'm cool with discussing the positives and negatives.

So, let's talk about the downside of the OSR.

Where has the OSR gone wrong?

What's missing from the OSR that would make it better?

What changes would like to see to OSR "culture"?

Of course, many people will say there's no organized OSR and that's right, but I think we can agree there is a general design ethos, some level of general agreement among OSR fans and something akin to a OSR community online.

And with something as loose as the OSR, its quite possible that for every downside we mention, someone else will point out that a certain OSR publisher addressed that issue.

So...fight on!

Embracing a time period instead of a singular game. It would be nice to see more old game love besides TSR D&D. Too many clones, not enough adventures. (Though some of the settings have been stellar!)

(Oh, also "inclusion, intersectionality, excelsior, dominant narrative, privilege, Hastur, Hastur, Hastur, and deprotagonized sparrow." Thank goodness DIY rules are everywhere around me... like Yog-Sothoth! :eek: )

I suppose that one downside could be the folks who use the OSR as a club to try to force others to play their style of game?

Dunno. As a guy who never really left the old school games, I'm glad that others are getting the encouragement to try those and I'm glad that folks are writing adventures for those editions again. But some folks come off as snobby or elitist and bash newer editions because they aren't OSR editions, and that's a bad thing because we should all encourage games of all styles so that the entire hobby grows together.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1093626the downside of the OSR

Endless scholastic hair splitting arguments over how to define the OSR and what counts as OSR and what doesn't.

First, there are things I don't count as downsides. Every gaming trend has its annoying evangelists, commercialists, crooks, weirdos and wannabe popes; not to mention splinter groups, purists and just plain assholes. It comes with the territory, and success brings in a lot more of these people.

But speaking as someone who preferred old-school gaming when the brand and the logo did not yet exist, I preferred it when it had more camaraderie and fewer attempts to purge the undesirables, and was more focused on rediscovering and advancing certain playstyle than pretending about Being a Movement. The initial energy you see in things like Fight On!, Monsters of Myth and a host of early blogs and forum discussions was contagious, and there was just less of that after G+ took over (and produced a lot of things that would mostly get trashed once Google pulled the plug on it).

I think I would have liked to see more games and supplements that took old-school design lessons into account, and applied them outside the scope of old-school systems. There was some of it, but not really as much as it would have been possible. For instance, most non-old-school adventure modules still suck, badly, and new game systems are just as mired in bad "storytelling".

Oh this easy.

1. Characters tend to lack mechanical toys to keep players interested and give them a sense of control over what they do.

2. Most OSR games need to do a better job describing how to use them.

3. Bullshit like descending AC and other weird nostalgic artifacts.

4. OSR games seem pointless to me for non-sandbox campaigns.

Too many systems (and adventures) based on Dungeon Crawls.

Copy and paste monsters.

My perspective is mostly from the outside looking in.  That grain of salt tossed in ...

Perhaps there is a conflict in the OSR between the drive for innovation versus the drive for refinement?  A DIY ethos is useful when, "The things out there don't satisfy me.  I'm driven to do something different."  If the thing is then different enough, there might also be an urge to share the thing.  However, the DIY ethos is not necessarily the best way to refine it.  For refinement, you need time, distance, and almost always someone else with a talent for refinement and the ability to park their ego while they refine someone else's innovation.  

I hear this refrain over and over:  "The games we have are good enough.  What we need is more and better supplements."  Maybe for you.  For me, I'm not entirely happy with any of the systems, but am happy to put my DIY into my own adventures instead of supplements very seldom written to my tastes.  Clearly, the games we have are not good enough, given the number of people so unsatisfied with them that they spend hundreds of unpaid hours trying to make something else.  

Though I'm not sure that all of the above is so much a "downside of the OSR" as more of a "downside to the nature of the problem the OSR is grappling with".

I'd say the biggest issue that keeps me from being able to embrace it is the elements of its fanbase putting down any suggestions that aren't derived from the pre-2e game and any attempt to implement tools that would make it easier to run

For example, Encounter Budgets are of the Devil because how dare a GM be able to judge the difficulty of what they're throwing at the party by anything other than guesswork (and apparently being able to judge might cause a GM to not put what they originally wanted into their sandbox because they know it would cause a TPK).

Similarly that nothing really needs to be done to allow for particular genre emulation when it's Vancian casting, divine-siloed healing and magic item Christmas trees are found nowhere outside of materials derived from D&D. Or that any attempts to use anything but Tolkeinesque races is badwrongfun.

In short... from my experience with it the OSR has a disproportionately high concentration of "One True Way" fans and those make anything less fun.

"Old School" has almost become defined as "OD&D-like", ignoring other old games such as Runequest.

There are no downside to the OSR. There may be downside to specific groups and niches within the OSR.

Open Content
The OSR rests on a foundation of open content. The "hack" that started it all was the observation that if you strip newer mechanics out of the D20 SRD, like feats and skills, what left is a hop and a skip from a classic edition of D&D. Chris Gonnerman, Matt Finch, and Stuart Marshall were the first to do this with OSRIC and Basic Fantasy. Then were quickly followed by other clones. Along with products either taking advantage of the clones or the open content to produce adventures and supplements.

The D20 SRD and many of the clones are available in wiki form or editable document for anybody to use. Whatever an individual thinks the OSR is not doing right with classic D&D, the means are there to allow them to it the "right way" whatever that is in their judgment.

Digital Technology
While not a unique factor to the OSR, it took advantage of Digital Technology (the Internet, Print on Demand, PDF) and exploited it to the fullest. Largely because in the few three years, writing or supporting clones was viewed as a legal risk among D20 Publishers who catered to old school gamers. So many projects were done by individuals or small teams risking little capital. In addition fans of classic editions of D&D were a lot fewer in the early 2000s and the Internet was the only practical way to gather and talk about their favorite editions.

More than a few of the early OSR publishers were able to generate enough sales or interest to go on to do better and more ambitious projects. Because this was played out publicly on the Internet, people could and did following along and see what worked and what didn't to realize their own project.

Also Digital Technology meant individual could efficiently distribute their content. Whether it is just few page of note, or a full color hardback with all the trimmings. You didn't have to lay down a bunch of money for a print run, try get it in the Warehouse of distributors and hope games store order it and put it on their shelf. Digital Technology opened up the possibility of publishing within the time one has for a hobby.

When is there is a downside?
Downsides are confined to specific niches or groups. A common one encountered occurs if somebody is trying to share or sell their material. You have to act as your own sales department. This is a not a problem unique to the OSR but is a side effect of the Internet economy. There are creative individual are not interested or have the knack working sales even if it is own their own behalf.

The good news there are OSR publishers who are organized enough to employ freelancers or known to collaborate with individual authors. For example Frog God Games or Lamentations of the Flame Princess. There are independent publishers who are also publish OSR products like the various companies that the Pundit worked with over the years.

Most of the complaints are about the OSR advocate X, don't like play style X, or refuse to consider Z mechanics. All of these complaints are true but only of specific individual, groups, or niches. They are not true of the OSR as a whole. Which is a kalidoscope of attitudes and interests. The only common elements is it ties back to a classic edition of D&D.

Even then individual authors are interested other genres, or RPGs. So there are large segments of the OSR that are classic D&D + X, with X varying depending on the interest of the group. For example Dan Proctor , Labyrinth Lord, Gore, Pacesetter Games, Starships & Spacemen, etc.

All of these complaints can resolved by avoiding the individuals or group involved. The availability of open content and low barrier created by digital technology means that anybody interested in the OSR is not beholden to anybody whole labels themselves are part of the OSR. Not me, not Matt Finch, not James Raggi, or any other name you have heard of.

Sure it may be easier to work one of the OSR groups, but realize that reason there are many OSR groups to begin with is that there were disagreement from the get go. Some acrimonious, but most were because of individual authors, like myself, having a creative vision that didn't line up with one of the groups that existed at the time.

The OSR is what results when there are people interested in a body of work that are free from legal and technological constraints. Despite various efforts over their to "control" the OSR they all failed because there is nothing to control. The OSR is what you make it to be in the form you want it to be.

Wrapping it up
If you don't believe me or disagree with me, then I give you the same challenge that I gave to the RPGPundit years ago. Come up with a project, write, get it in shape, and then share/sell it. Don't take my word for it, experience it yourself. The only thing it will cost you is your time.

If you are unclear about the nuts and bolts of how to do this, ask me or other you consider knowledgeable.

Quote from: The Exploited.;1093639Too many systems (and adventures) based on Dungeon Crawls.

My first instinct is to agree with this, but then it occurs to me: isn't OD&D all about dungeon crawl from a design standpoint? And if so, wouldn't it be contradictory wanting it to do things other than dungeon crawls?

Quote from: Itachi;1093654My first instinct is to agree with this, but then it occurs to me: isn't OD&D all about dungeon crawl from a design standpoint? And if so, wouldn't it be contradictory wanting it to do things other than dungeon crawls?

Well for one thing the third of the 3 LBB is titled Wilderness & Underworld Adventures. Includes among other things rules for building strongholds, aerial and naval combat.

As far as the OSR goes it only contradictory to do things other than dungeon crawls with OD&D or one of its clone if you think it is contradictory. Play or write accordingly. If you thinks otherwise then play or write accordingly.

Scrooge of the Demon Wolf is an Swords & Wizardry adventure and not a dungeon crawl. And there are many other adventures like it as well as dungeon crawls. Both categories have best sellers or high downloads both categories have poor sellers or low downloads.

There are 235 adventures for Swords & Wizardry alone.

Quote from: Itachi;1093654My first instinct is to agree with this, but then it occurs to me: isn't OD&D all about dungeon crawl from a design standpoint? And if so, wouldn't it be contradictory wanting it to do things other than dungeon crawls?

You're right mate that's a fair point. That was always the concept behind most of the OD&D games I played.

I guess the Isle of Dread set the standard for me. Basically, there was a lot of sea and jungle adventuring while the dungeon crawling aspect was the smaller part of the adventure. So it gave me a taste for wilderness stuff (that and early WHFRP).

My favorite aspects of the OSR are the innovation and elegant way the rules have been revamped. Also how the original concepts have been expended and no longer constrain the game as a whole.

For example scenarios like Fish Fuckers, Midderlands and games like Beyond the Wall, Heroes Journey, etc.

Don't get me wrong, if people like playing Dungeon Crawls all the time that's cool but it's not really something that I'm into.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1093629Embracing a time period instead of a singular game. It would be nice to see more old game love besides TSR D&D. Too many clones, not enough adventures. (Though some of the settings have been stellar!)

&

Quote from: Trond;1093647"Old School" has almost become defined as "OD&D-like", ignoring other old games such as Runequest.

Some of us DO consider other games from before 198something as part of the OSR, and it's lucky there are OGL (or other similar license) SRDs of them.

For instance Openquest, Cepheus Engine, OpenD6 and Interlock (Action! System or OpenCore).

And I for one enjoy games like BoL that are more of a "OSR Feel" kinda game.

Agreed we need more adventures and modules and games not of the Tolkienesque fantasy style.

Quote from: The Exploited.;1093639Copy and paste monsters.

Tell me about it, but after 45 years of D&D plus the other younger games I don't think you can really make trully original Monsters.

I have been working on and off again on a bestiary that will be placed under the public domain of Non TSR monsters (and found out I forgot some of their write ups).

But then again they can't copyright mythology, so we have to work around their IP and try and come up with new write ups that are more to our liking.