This is a not a question about what is the OSR
I'm not terribly interested in questions of that sort as they are by nature pedantic affairs that never yield practical answers.
No I'm much more interested in the what set of mechanics do or do not make a game compatible with the OSR. Mainly what makes a game compatible with the monsters and adventures of the OSR world.
I've recently picked up the Fantasy Trip, it has the sole element of GURPS I really like, which is how elegant I think the 3d6 roll under mechanic is, I wonder if you could make a classless, leveless, 3d6 fantasy game and it generally work with the OSR adventures, monsters and modules as easy as a retroclone.
Quote from: Socratic-DM on December 10, 2023, 01:35:25 PM
This is a not a question about what is the OSR
I'm not terribly interested in questions of that sort as they are by nature pedantic affairs that never yield practical answers.
No I'm much more interested in the what set of mechanics do or do not make a game compatible with the OSR. Mainly what makes a game compatible with the monsters and adventures of the OSR world.
I've recently picked up the Fantasy Trip, it has the sole element of GURPS I really like, which is how elegant I think the 3d6 roll under mechanic is, I wonder if you could make a classless, leveless, 3d6 fantasy game and it generally work with the OSR adventures, monsters and modules as easy as a retroclone.
Well, TFT is certainly classified as old school these days. You could use D&D based old school adventures with it but it would take a bit of work to convert. All OSR mainstream fantasy material shares a lingua franca that is easily useable with OD&D, B/X, BECMI, and AD&D. Six statistics, class based, AC as static defense, and scaling HP are the core of it. TFT is available again so I don't why anyone would want a clone unless it offered something added that was really new and cool. Adventures written for TFT would be a better bet. Then again, with SJG's attitude you probably would have to make your own retro-clone in order to do that.
It depends on who you ask. Some people say to be OSR had better be a reworking of B/X, AD&D, and so on. Others will tell you it's any old game dating back to around 1983. Me? I think it's a reworking of any old game. Pundit IIRC will tell you it's got to be D&D based. If we could run a poll here it might give you a better view. I think I've seen polls here, but I can't fully recall.
If I read the OP correctly, the question could possibly be rephrased as "what games that aren't based on Basic D&D are easy to use OSR materials with?" If so, then I would say it comes down to how many shared assumptions there are between the two games.
Last year, I ran a campaign of Dragon Warriors (https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/90926/dragon-warriors) which I found to be pretty easy to use OSR material with. It's a different underlying system, but it's still a medieval fantasy game with a 3-18 attribute range and broadly comparable class and level progression. So if a module says an NPC is a 4th level fighter, I can go into the DW Companion book and just look up the average stats for a 4th rank knight or barbarian. Dragon Warriors doesn't have saving throws, but between attribute checks and the Evasion and Magic Defense stats, it's pretty easy to replace a saving throw if a module calls for one. It also doesn't have hit dice, but again, it's pretty easy to just say "well, this creature should probably have the same HP as a troll" or whatever, and then just find and replace.
Quote from: Socratic-DM on December 10, 2023, 01:35:25 PM
This is a not a question about what is the OSR
I'm not terribly interested in questions of that sort as they are by nature pedantic affairs that never yield practical answers.
No I'm much more interested in the what set of mechanics do or do not make a game compatible with the OSR. Mainly what makes a game compatible with the monsters and adventures of the OSR world.
I've recently picked up the Fantasy Trip, it has the sole element of GURPS I really like, which is how elegant I think the 3d6 roll under mechanic is, I wonder if you could make a classless, leveless, 3d6 fantasy game and it generally work with the OSR adventures, monsters and modules as easy as a retroclone.
How can anyone answer that question before answering what the OSR is?
I mean, if you include Cepheus, Faserip, Warhammer Fantasy, The Fantasy Trip AND Old School D&D (2e tops by most accounts), then there's no compatible mechanics because you have diluted the meaning to encompass ALL Old School games up to 1977-89.
Now, you can use the modules from any game with any other game if you're willing to do the conversion.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 10, 2023, 03:45:33 PM
Quote from: Socratic-DM on December 10, 2023, 01:35:25 PM
This is a not a question about what is the OSR
I'm not terribly interested in questions of that sort as they are by nature pedantic affairs that never yield practical answers.
No I'm much more interested in the what set of mechanics do or do not make a game compatible with the OSR. Mainly what makes a game compatible with the monsters and adventures of the OSR world.
I've recently picked up the Fantasy Trip, it has the sole element of GURPS I really like, which is how elegant I think the 3d6 roll under mechanic is, I wonder if you could make a classless, leveless, 3d6 fantasy game and it generally work with the OSR adventures, monsters and modules as easy as a retroclone.
How can anyone answer that question before answering what the OSR is?
I mean, if you include Cepheus, Faserip, Warhammer Fantasy, The Fantasy Trip AND Old School D&D (2e tops by most accounts), then there's no compatible mechanics because you have diluted the meaning to encompass ALL Old School games up to 1977-89.
Now, you can use the modules from any game with any other game if you're willing to do the conversion.
I then should have been clear, OD&D, B/X, BECMI, and AD&D and clones, as they are easily no doubt the majority of retroclones out there.
Quote from: ForgottenF on December 10, 2023, 03:44:49 PM
If I read the OP correctly, the question could possibly be rephrased as "what games that aren't based on Basic D&D are easy to use OSR materials with?" If so, then I would say it comes down to how many shared assumptions there are between the two games.
Last year, I ran a campaign of Dragon Warriors (https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/90926/dragon-warriors) which I found to be pretty easy to use OSR material with. It's a different underlying system, but it's still a medieval fantasy game with a 3-18 attribute range and broadly comparable class and level progression. So if a module says an NPC is a 4th level fighter, I can go into the DW Companion book and just look up the average stats for a 4th rank knight or barbarian. Dragon Warriors doesn't have saving throws, but between attribute checks and the Evasion and Magic Defense stats, it's pretty easy to replace a saving throw if a module calls for one. It also doesn't have hit dice, but again, it's pretty easy to just say "well, this creature should probably have the same HP as a troll" or whatever, and then just find and replace.
You are correct that would have been a better title, more precisely what I'm getting at is, I'd like to design something that has some of the same core assumption, but with a generally different expression. so if I had a classless, leveless system, then having a monster Save as fighter 5 doesn't make sense, or if I have a health tracks, then HD don't make much sense, but I still want to be compatible with those things.
I'm also taking into account RPGpundit's adviice, everything really should consider early D&D in it's design phase, and I'd like to make something that has very different mechanical expressions, but which can really easily or on the fly use OSR D&D content.
Quote from: Socratic-DM on December 10, 2023, 04:11:27 PM
Quote from: ForgottenF on December 10, 2023, 03:44:49 PM
If I read the OP correctly, the question could possibly be rephrased as "what games that aren't based on Basic D&D are easy to use OSR materials with?" If so, then I would say it comes down to how many shared assumptions there are between the two games.
Last year, I ran a campaign of Dragon Warriors (https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/90926/dragon-warriors) which I found to be pretty easy to use OSR material with. It's a different underlying system, but it's still a medieval fantasy game with a 3-18 attribute range and broadly comparable class and level progression. So if a module says an NPC is a 4th level fighter, I can go into the DW Companion book and just look up the average stats for a 4th rank knight or barbarian. Dragon Warriors doesn't have saving throws, but between attribute checks and the Evasion and Magic Defense stats, it's pretty easy to replace a saving throw if a module calls for one. It also doesn't have hit dice, but again, it's pretty easy to just say "well, this creature should probably have the same HP as a troll" or whatever, and then just find and replace.
You are correct that would have been a better title, more precisely what I'm getting at is, I'd like to design something that has some of the same core assumption, but with a generally different expression. so if I had a classless, leveless system, then having a monster Save as fighter 5 doesn't make sense, or if I have a health tracks, then HD don't make much sense, but I still want to be compatible with those things.
I'm also taking into account RPGpundit's adviice, everything really should consider early D&D in it's design phase, and I'd like to make something that has very different mechanical expressions, but which can really easily or on the fly use OSR D&D content.
Most OSR games are "Basic D&D but
X", and "Basic D&D but
classless" is the one permutation I want to see but haven't, so I wish you luck with it.
Class and level are about as fundamental to the assumptions of D&D as you can get, so stripping those out and remaining compatible with OSR games is probably going to be a tall order. And if you're going to strip out hit points, then the Armor Class system probably won't make sense anymore, either.
So what does that leave you with? Not much. I guess if you still build your game around procedural dungeon crawling, that would line up with the sensibilities expressed by OSR modules. You'd want ready analogs for things like reaction rolls, surprise, the whole "listen at door -> search for traps -> disarm traps" workflow, and some mechanic that does the same job as saving throws, maybe with an approximate analogue for the Fort/Ref/Will system, since that's pretty easy to convert the Basic 5-save system to on the fly. That way you'd be preserving the same basic game-flow, even if the stats don't transfer over.
The stats not transferring isn't that big a deal, I suppose. Plenty of games include (or have fan-made) conversion guides for porting D&D stat blocks into their system. Savage Worlds has some particularly good ones you could possibly use for inspiration.
As a general rule, I find it easier to convert material from a more complex game to a simpler one, but that might not be very helpful advice. You can't go much simpler than B/X D&D and still have a game left to play.
Quote from: ForgottenF on December 10, 2023, 04:48:31 PM
Quote from: Socratic-DM on December 10, 2023, 04:11:27 PM
Quote from: ForgottenF on December 10, 2023, 03:44:49 PM
If I read the OP correctly, the question could possibly be rephrased as "what games that aren't based on Basic D&D are easy to use OSR materials with?" If so, then I would say it comes down to how many shared assumptions there are between the two games.
Last year, I ran a campaign of Dragon Warriors (https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/90926/dragon-warriors) which I found to be pretty easy to use OSR material with. It's a different underlying system, but it's still a medieval fantasy game with a 3-18 attribute range and broadly comparable class and level progression. So if a module says an NPC is a 4th level fighter, I can go into the DW Companion book and just look up the average stats for a 4th rank knight or barbarian. Dragon Warriors doesn't have saving throws, but between attribute checks and the Evasion and Magic Defense stats, it's pretty easy to replace a saving throw if a module calls for one. It also doesn't have hit dice, but again, it's pretty easy to just say "well, this creature should probably have the same HP as a troll" or whatever, and then just find and replace.
You are correct that would have been a better title, more precisely what I'm getting at is, I'd like to design something that has some of the same core assumption, but with a generally different expression. so if I had a classless, leveless system, then having a monster Save as fighter 5 doesn't make sense, or if I have a health tracks, then HD don't make much sense, but I still want to be compatible with those things.
I'm also taking into account RPGpundit's adviice, everything really should consider early D&D in it's design phase, and I'd like to make something that has very different mechanical expressions, but which can really easily or on the fly use OSR D&D content.
Most OSR games are "Basic D&D but X", and "Basic D&D but classless" is the one permutation I want to see but haven't, so I wish you luck with it.
Class and level are about as fundamental to the assumptions of D&D as you can get, so stripping those out and remaining compatible with OSR games is probably going to be a tall order. And if you're going to strip out hit points, then the Armor Class system probably won't make sense anymore, either.
So what does that leave you with? Not much. I guess if you still build your game around procedural dungeon crawling, that would line up with the sensibilities expressed by OSR modules. You'd want ready analogs for things like reaction rolls, surprise, the whole "listen at door -> search for traps -> disarm traps" workflow, and some mechanic that does the same job as saving throws, maybe with an approximate analogue for the Fort/Ref/Will system, since that's pretty easy to convert the Basic 5-save system to on the fly. That way you'd be preserving the same basic game-flow, even if the stats don't transfer over.
The stats not transferring isn't that big a deal, I suppose. Plenty of games include (or have fan-made) conversion guides for porting D&D stat blocks into their system. Savage Worlds has some particularly good ones you could possibly use for inspiration.
As a general rule, I find it easier to convert material from a more complex game to a simpler one, but that might not be very helpful advice. You can't go much simpler than B/X D&D and still have a game left to play.
Well thinking on the subject, monster and player stats generally don't need to be reflective of one another, and the stat that pulls the most heavy lifting in my opinion is HD in the case of monsters, as at least the retroclones I've seen it is their to hit bonus, and HP. and generally if xp is rewarded for killing, it scales from HD as well.
One concept of the game the health track, which is size + Stamina/constitution. HD in place of the stamina or vitality type stat makes sense to me.
Likewise damage and number of attacks is preserved across my idea pretty well, saving throws is a bit more of a puzzler. I think as a goal of design for this is that B/X style monster cards should work flawlessly in this system.
Quote from: Socratic-DM on December 10, 2023, 05:38:04 PM
One concept of the game the health track, which is size + Stamina/constitution. HD in place of the stamina or vitality type stat makes sense to me.
I guess? I'm not really visualizing what you mean by the health track, so I can't say.
Quote from: Socratic-DM on December 10, 2023, 05:38:04 PM
Likewise damage and number of attacks is preserved across my idea pretty well, saving throws is a bit more of a puzzler. I think as a goal of design for this is that B/X style monster cards should work flawlessly in this system.
The logical question then is what are you using in lieu of saving throws? What is the mechanic for dodging a falling statue or resisting a mind control spell?
To be fair, and GeekyBugle has already addressed this, what the OSR is directly affects what rules make something compatible with the OSR. However, since you narrowed it down a bit by specifically saying, " OD&D, B/X, BECMI, and AD&D and clones" that should make it a lot clearer.
Something to keep in mind is that the rules of a game (usually) influence how the players play the game. So take something like XP for gold. The players know they can get much much more XP for stealing 1,000gp from 10 goblins than they will ever get from slaying those 10 goblins. Therefore, their actions (usually) will align with this. They may pursue options that don't involve combat. That's also why settings like Mystara work so well: the rules are reflected in the setting, with also reflects the players' playstyle: everyone is expected to adventure, adventurers are frequently trying to create domains, and the races all reflect their game rules.
In my estimation, I think what makes a game OSR compatible is whether or not it's trying to corral the players into the OSR playstyle. I'm sure my definition of that playstyle won't be agreed upon by everyone, and I'm not trying to start any flame wars here, but I'll take a crack. The OSR playstyle is that of dungeon-crawling and exploration, with the eventual aim of creating a player domain. This is all held together by a rules set that isn't rules light, but isn't so airtight that you can't change them without derailing the rules set. This isn't a perfect definition, but it's what I'm gonna work off for now.
So for an example: I'd say B2: Keep on the Borderlands and OSRIC are compatible with the OSR, but Red Hand of Doom and 4th Edition D&D are not. But if a game swapped Strength for Power, or used ascending AC over Thac0, that doesn't really make a game non-OSR.
Personally, I think the stat block for monsters/npcs.
Are there hit dice and hit points (the latter maxing out at 300-400 for gods and kaiju)? Is there an Armor Class? Does it go from 10 (or 9) down to -10 or so or up to 30 or so? (BECMI did have a wider range, to be fair)
Damage is also useful, but comparing it to a weapon can help, although many monsters should do a lot more damage than a weapon.
So something like AC 3(17); HD 5; hp 30; Atk 1-10/1-10 is pretty much the bare minimum to be OSR compatible.
Something for 5e or 3e or something else might have those elements, but not in the same ranges as OSR
The other thing I think what makes games OSR compatible is if they keep the old games (at least how we played back in the day) emphasis on resource management.
Like how far into the dungeon do we go before turning back? The characters resources are slowly whittled away, hit points are lost, spells are cast, you start reaching carrying capacity. And how much do you keep in reserve in case you run into a monster on the way home?
The nature of the old style D&D rules was that those things are generally gradually worn away. Sure there are cases when you could get killed, usually failing a saving throw or doing something stupid, but overall it was ablative.
I don't think that works if your game doesn't have constantly increasing hit points and spell slots that aren't easily replaced.
My question is a bit more practical. I have a small number of OSR books.
(https://i.imgur.com/9hMdqMM.png)
I am looking at the vast number of products on the market labeled OSR. How do I tell which ones will be compatible with what I already have without a lot of farting around?
Quote from: Socratic-DM on December 10, 2023, 01:35:25 PM
This is a not a question about what is the OSR
It will inevitably become that though. It's difficult to determine what is compatible with the OSR without knowing what the OSR is.
Quote from: yosemitemike on December 10, 2023, 11:08:49 PM
My question is a bit more practical. I have a small number of OSR books.
(https://i.imgur.com/9hMdqMM.png)
I am looking at the vast number of products on the market labeled OSR. How do I tell which ones will be compatible with what I already have without a lot of farting around?
Quote from: Socratic-DM on December 10, 2023, 01:35:25 PM
This is a not a question about what is the OSR
It will inevitably become that though. It's difficult to determine what is compatible with the OSR without knowing what the OSR is.
Not a complete list but it might help you:
http://taxidermicowlbear.weebly.com/dd-retroclones.html (http://taxidermicowlbear.weebly.com/dd-retroclones.html)
Quote from: 1stLevelWizard on December 10, 2023, 07:39:36 PM
In my estimation, I think what makes a game OSR compatible is whether or not it's trying to corral the players into the OSR playstyle. I'm sure my definition of that playstyle won't be agreed upon by everyone, and I'm not trying to start any flame wars here, but I'll take a crack. The OSR playstyle is that of dungeon-crawling and exploration, with the eventual aim of creating a player domain. This is all held together by a rules set that isn't rules light, but isn't so airtight that you can't change them without derailing the rules set. This isn't a perfect definition, but it's what I'm gonna work off for now.
So for an example: I'd say B2: Keep on the Borderlands and OSRIC are compatible with the OSR, but Red Hand of Doom and 4th Edition D&D are not. But if a game swapped Strength for Power, or used ascending AC over Thac0, that doesn't really make a game non-OSR.
I largely agree. If we were to create character sheets for game styles, I don't think AC vs Thac0 would make the cut. My list would be something more like:
1) Progression. What is the nature of the path to PC godhood? Do they start there or do they work at it? Do they move at the same rate out of a sense of fairness, or progress asymmetrically because that makes sense for the setting? Is it entirely their own doing or a combination of environmental factors (equipment, gods, etc)?
2) Purpose. Why do these characters do what they are doing? Are these simulations of what being in that world might be like, or are these representations of what our current world looks like?
3) Mechanical tightness. Rulings vs rules.
4) Balance. To what degree does fairness to the people playing the game change what makes sense in the world?
That sort of thing.
Quote from: Socratic-DM on December 10, 2023, 04:11:27 PM
I'm also taking into account RPGpundit's adviice, everything really should consider early D&D in it's design phase, and I'd like to make something that has very different mechanical expressions, but which can really easily or on the fly use OSR D&D content.
I ran GURPS for 20 years and before that Fantasy Hero used the same setting I used for my AD&D 1e campaigns (The Majestic Wilderlands). Then around 2009, I returned to D&D using OD&D/Swords & Wizardry to create my Majestic Fantasy RPG.
Along with that I created some adventures like Scourge of the Demon Wolf that I ran under multiple systems.
The first thing is to ditch any idea of mechanical equivalence. Instead what you want to do is look at what an adventure or setting means as if you were there looking things over.
First the characters, are they novices? Perhaps journeyman level of skill? Masters at their profession? Finally, maybe they have skills that are considered at the level of the Nobel Prize or the Olympics? Next are the creatures. Are they creatures that a novice can take on, a journeyman, and so on? The environmental challenges can be considered in the same light.
When I leap to a new system, I first identify who are the novices, journeymen, masters, and elites. Then I look at the creatures and environmental challenges. I see how that lines up with what I did in the past with the Majestic Wilderlands. It doesn't have to be exact but there is a point where I will jettison that element of the new rules and make something that fits what I did in the past.
But you are making a new system so while it is a lot of work you have the advantage of tweaking things without having to uphold other folks expectations of the system.
Some things specific to classic D&D.
For characters I consider the experience range to be as follows
1st to 3rd Novices
4th to 6th Journeymen
7th to 9th Masters
10th to 12th Elite (Nobel/Olympic)
13th to 16th The Best of Best only a handful appear each century.
First from OD&D to AD&D 1e (original 3 books), characters are heroes, not superheroes. A mob of Novices and Journeymen can take down a party at pretty much any level. However, keep in mind this will rarely happen to a smart group
Generally using OD&D 3 LBBs as a foundation comes the closest to how more gritty RPGs like GURPS, Runequest, and Harnmaster play out. OD&D + Supplement and B/X are OK, AD&D 1e if you don't use Unearthed Arcana and the later Monster Manual works as well. This is mostly because the AD&D Monster Manual was written first, it retained a lot of its OD&D roots.
For your 3D6 game you will want to consider the following categories of elements.
Characters
Monsters
The Environment (Traps, and other challenges)
Magic
Treasure.
One factor to consider is that classic D&D has magic that works well for mass combat. Fireball, Cloudkill, etc. Most other fantasy RPGs tend to tone down their magic in that regard. Mages are still formidable but more as individual combatants.
Pay attention to what works in classic D&D as far as creatures (and characters) operating solo versus in groups.
Pay attention to the fact that in classic D&D the preferred method of power gaming is the acquisition of the "right" set of magic items. For your 3D6 system, you want to make sure you have a similar range of magic items.
A lot of folks will tell you that the solution to powergaming is to make magic items special and rare. But that is a bit of a bullshit argument as there is no size fit all campaign solution. Set up your recommended treasure distribution but account for when campaigns are more generous with the magic items by tweaking the actual list itself.
For example for my Majestic Fantasy RPG, I started with a range of +1 to +5 magic items. But after the 2nd playtest axed the +4, and +5 bonus (and their miscellaneous MI equivalents).
I found that if you play long enough, eventually the players will acquire some type of ideal assortment of magic items. Whether it is GURPS or OD&D.
Last and most important, is playtest, playtest, playtest. Both with your new system and an edition of classic D&D. Run the same adventures, and setting for both. The reality is that design prowess is only going to get you so far. There is no substitute for experience through actual play.
While I have 40 years' worth of experience in this, I was able to get up to speed with developing my Majestic Fantasy OD&D in a far shorter time by paying attention to the details and running multiple campaigns and sessions at conventions.
The Majestic Fantasy RPG, that I wrote is a reflection of how stuff worked in my GURPS campaign. The classes are translations of templates I used. The brand new stuff I added were things that OD&D didn't handle like skills for stuff outside of combat and spellcasting.
I was lucky that through my own work or finding stuff on the GURPS forums I continued to adapt D&D adventures when I didn't have time to fully prep my stuff. So it was easier to backport to OD&D when I started that project.
I also helped Douglas Cole of Gaming Ballistic with advice and tips for converting his Fantasy Trip Solo adventures over to Old School Essentials (B/X). One tool I showed him was this
http://www.batintheattic.com/dnd_combat
This allowed to play with some number to get a baseline on different power level in classic D&D.
Hope this helps.
If Runequest is included (and it should be, having its origins in the 70s) then the amount of compatible material is pretty massive from that angle as well.
Quote3) Mechanical tightness. Rulings vs rules
This is a good point too. It's not necessarily rules light, but the rules are much more open ended. As a player of 3rd and 2nd edition, I can say that while 2nd can be meaty, it's more often than not a concise set of rules. There's room for DM fiat without missing out on important rules.
It's like how someone mentioned that a 5e/3e statline is much meatier than a BECMI statline.
Compatible?
Most games that are compatible to TSR D&D say so (albeit indirectly) on the cover, blurb or DTRPG label.
Runequest is old school but not "compatible" with B/X, and 3e is not exactly compatible with TSR either - 4e is not even close.
TFT is closer to GURPS than to D&D IIRC.
I think for a game to be compatible it needs easy, on the fly, conversion.
Of course an experience GM (such as estar and douglas) can do this with any two systems, but compatibility means "easy to convert" IMO, and Runequest/GURPS are not that easy to covert to D&D.
"Fighter 3" means nothing in both those systems, but it is a thing you can find in a TSR module.
Otherwise, you can convert anything by simply swapping a TSR goblin for a GURPS or Dungeon World goblin. You can convert anything to RISUS because it is a very easy system. Doesn't mean the systems are compatible.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on December 11, 2023, 04:33:03 PM
Otherwise, you can convert anything by simply swapping a TSR goblin for a GURPS or Dungeon World goblin.
Your mileage will definitely vary once you go further than a goblin.
I'll soon be wrapping up a PF(1e) to D&D 5e converted game that's had quite a few warts due to the conversion.
One big difference is how Pathfinder provided you with many, many rooms of monsters to wait patiently to be killed by the PCs. There wasn't any other way to level up in a reasonable amount of time. They also stacked their monsters with a lot more mechanical complexity than you're going to find in 5e, with fewer hit points and a higher armor class.
One-to-one swaps get harder and harder the higher level the party gets.
Quote from: Socratic-DM on December 10, 2023, 01:35:25 PM
This is a not a question about what is the OSR
That is the soul of the question, actually. I can easily say what I would call OSR-compatible: monster stat blocks that put inline an AC or Defense, HD, hit points, attacks, move, etc., with number values that exist somewhere in the Basic D&D to AD&D 2e continuum. It's the sort of thing we would heedlessly mash together, across multiple editions, across incompatible expansion materials and the perilous D&D/AD&D divide. Like how B4 duplicated some monster stat blocks because of the differences in the example monsters between Basic, and Other Basic.
But if you mean any game that's compatible with another OSR game, well. Runequest? DC Heroes? Top Secret? What about Top Secret S.I.? At that point, when you say compatible, what are you meaning you intend to do with it?
Or are you asking, essentially, if a game has to have certain requirements to be an OSR game, and that is what you mean by compatibility?
To clarify.
OSR has at least three meanings:
- Compatible with TSR-era D&D (even vaguely).
- Inspired by older RPGs, usually pre-1990 (an immense group of games).
- Adopting design principles valued by modern OSR circles, NOT necessarily present in TSR-era D&D (eg. rulings, simplicity, etc.)
So, a game can be called "OSR" and STILL not be compatible (although I feel any classification that puts D&D, WFRP, Runequest and Traveller in the same category to be nearly useless).
Quote from: Eric Diaz on December 11, 2023, 07:45:10 PM
To clarify.
OSR has at least three meanings:
- Compatible with TSR-era D&D (even vaguely).
- Inspired by older RPGs, usually pre-1990 (an immense group of games).
- Adopting design principles valued by modern OSR circles, NOT necessarily present in TSR-era D&D (eg. rulings, simplicity, etc.)
So the label has been stretched to the point of losing any real meaning.
1&2 aren't mutually exclusive, take Pundit's Arrows of Indra, it's not a straight retroclone with different races/classes, yet you can import those races, classes and monsters to any OSR (the real one) game with little to zero conversion needed.
White Box FMAG departs from TSR-era D&D in a few points, yet you can use adventures from those golden years with it with almost zero work, same goes for the games based on it or OSE and the games based on it.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 11, 2023, 07:53:55 PM
Quote from: Eric Diaz on December 11, 2023, 07:45:10 PM
To clarify.
OSR has at least three meanings:
- Compatible with TSR-era D&D (even vaguely).
- Inspired by older RPGs, usually pre-1990 (an immense group of games).
- Adopting design principles valued by modern OSR circles, NOT necessarily present in TSR-era D&D (eg. rulings, simplicity, etc.)
So the label has been stretched to the point of losing any real meaning.
1&2 aren't mutually exclusive, take Pundit's Arrows of Indra, it's not a straight retroclone with different races/classes, yet you can import those races, classes and monsters to any OSR (the real one) game with little to zero conversion needed.
White Box FMAG departs from TSR-era D&D in a few points, yet you can use adventures from those golden years with it with almost zero work, same goes for the games based on it or OSE and the games based on it.
Yes, exactly.
1 is the narrowest (and most useful IMO).
2 & 3 are so wide that they become almost meaningless. Anything can be "inspired" by old games, there are so many of them. Likewise, even Risus (a modern game) uses rules, simplicity, etc.
A game like White Box FMAG probably can be included in the three groups, but what really matters, like you said, is that you can "use adventures from those golden years with it with almost zero work".
Of course, there are shades of gray. LotFP is certainly OSR in this narrow sense, DCC is stretching it a bit, Mork Borg is "OSR-inspired" and not exactly OSR, IMO (from a brief read).
I should add that the term OSR was created in the 2000s, so T&T and Arcanum are "OS" but not "OSR".