General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
My son also plays D&D. My wife has said that she cannot figure out why D&D would be appealing. But she recently saw someone playing an AD&D game with some kids and though it looked interesting. From talking to her, the appeal was more of what was talked about in the Primer above. So I was thinking of getting some "Old School" experience before trying to run a game for them (and some others that I recruit). I was thinking of getting in an PbP game.
I was wondering a) where to look for some of these styles games and b) what should I learn: AD&D, OSRIC, Tunnels and Trolls, Swords and Wizardry. There seem to be a lot of choices. I am looking for something that others play so that I can find an online games and inhale some of this style.
thanks,
There are some places on the web that I'nm sure people are running these tpye of games. I don't play PbP so I'm not sure were.
As to what game you should learn, it really depends to what you have access to and personal preference. I like mixing OSRIC and 1e as they go together well and one smooths over the other. Plus I like the feel of having the old books infront of me and for the players to see. I really think it adds to the experience.
I would recommend Basic Fantasy or Labyrinth Lord as a starting point; both are available as free downloads, allow for easy adventure and character design, and are very easy to learn/play.
RC
P.S.: RCFG is unfinished, but you could move a campaign from almost any OS system into RCFG if you examined that system and found it to your liking. Better, because OS games tend to be modular, you can steal any RCFG materials for other games (such as OSRIC, Basic Fantasy, and Labyrinth Lord) if there are only bits you like.
P.P.S.: I had to include the above postscript because I am recommending someone else's game over my own! Best of luck!
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
If you're a hard copy lovin' person you can get hard copies of most of the above at the same links. A few of my other favorite in print, hard copy old school items:
__________________ <exasperated DM> "Underlying what? ... motivation? Do you want to play Dungeons & Dragons or not?"
<drama obsessed player> "How can I narrate my character's co-mingled sense of alienation and ennui towards modern society in this second-rate dungeon hack? My character returns to the surface and uses his remaining gold to start up an organic coffee shop that caters to left-wing revolutionaries... and hot elvish chicks."
Feel free to swing over to the Swords & Wizardry website (see sig, I think) if you want to ask about S&W or Original D&D. EDIT - It's not in my sig - the address is www.swordsandwizardry.com (and then hit the button for the forums).
The answer to your question is either really simple (play any one of them - it doesn't matter) or pretty complicated (long, scholarly dissertations on minute differences and how they can affect play).
OSRIC is easier to learn than AD&D because it's better organized. On the other hand, the writing is less magical than Gygax's inimitable prose. The OSRIC pdf is free, and the book is cheaper than most online prices for the originals. If you're even slightly patient, though, you can pick up the original books very cheaply.
Swords & Wizardry likewise - easier to learn, less awesome in the presentation. Free pdf, printed book is WAAAY less than paying $200+ for the originals.
If you want to play one of the Basic D&D editions, the originals are about as easy to learn as the retro-clones, but they aren't available in free pdf.
Welcome to Old School gaming. Swords and Wizardry and Labyrinth Lord are both excellent choices; my tastes run to the former (especially the White Box version).
I myself have yet to try T&T but it looks like its own brand of fun, as well.
__________________ "I despise all weavers of the black arts. Speaking of which, can you pass the gravy?"
Be forwarned that "old school" means different things to different people.
Take aspect X.
Some love "old school" because it had aspect X.
Some hate "old school" because it had aspect X.
Some love "old school" because it didn't have aspect X.
Some hate "old school" because it didn't have aspect X.
And depending on which book, combined with knowledge of some other book, combined with real world knowledge or imagination, all four people above could be absolutely right.
When something or someone tells you about "old school," know that someone else will tell you something completely opposite. And they both can be honest and correct from their own experiences.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but there is one or two things about old school that I didn't like, and I believe I found a system that caters to my tastes. Specifically, I *really* enjoyed the 3rd edition (and now 4th edition) "unified d20 mechanic." That is, bigger numbers are always better, and AC goes up (instead of into the negatives). That sooooo simplified things for me. Even my son when he was 5 could understand it.
Also, for most old school clones that adhere to the originals accurately, "elf" is a class. I didn't like the idea of races being classes.
So having said all of that, I believe that BFRPG (Basic Fantasy Role Playing Game) has both the "bigger is better" d20 mechanic, as well as keeping races & classes separate. However, other than those 2 changes, I understand that it's mostly a clone of 1st edition. Thus, most old modules would be compatible.
Of course, I should note that while my experience & love for 3.5 edition is hands-on and practical, my love for BFRPG is all book-learning and theoretical. I haven't played it, haven't even read most of it recently. So I may have details wrong.
Note that even though the site features a photo of the printed books, it is available on the site legally for free as a PDF download.
Those are not necessarily all using the original "little brown books" (LBB) of D&D, and in any case one of the free "retro clones" and clarification on "house rules" should do for a player. In practice, differences among campaigns stand out more than differences among editions. You've got familiar character types (fighter, cleric, mage, elf, etc.) with levels, hit dice, saving throws, armor class and experience points. Rules are really the DM's bailiwick, especially in play by post. Empire of the Petal Throne is inactive, but there's a Carcosa game.
There are a couple of T&T games at Vin's T&T TrollBridge - Home
Burke's Wild Lands game is basically 1st edition, with a complete player's handbook available from his site.
I play in some of the PbP games at the OD&D board linked above, and while they're great I don't know if I'd get an 'aha!' moment from them as easily as with face to face play. Where do you live? Are there local conventions or gamedays where you could find a game for hands-on experience? You might also post a note at a local gamestore - some old-schoolers might be best reached the old-fashioned way.
As for learning rules, my advice is don't. Kids make great old-school players because they reach for imagination first and don't assume they need mechanical support to do stuff. As a player, do whatever you can think of and see how the DM handles it.
When you DM, you'll need to know some rules and you'll get some authority from having a rule book in front of you, but you never want to look stuff up if it can be avoided. Most of what I do as an OD&D DM is unlearn assumptions I bring to the game.
The minimum you'll need is:
- a combat framework. Best if it can be expressed in a single sentence, like "Roll a d6 to see which side goes first, roll a d20 vs. AC to see if you deal damage."
- a way to tell if PCs succeed at life-or-death tasks. I talk to my players to agree on odds on a d6, but you could use an ability check etc. Again, simple = good.
- a framework for using dice to tell the story. How often do you roll for wandering monsters, how likely are they, what table do you use to see what shows up and what their reaction to the PCs are? In contrast to rules, IMO you can never have too many random tables (although a few you know how & when to use are much better than a lot you forget to look at). Kellri's Old-School Encounters Reference is a great resource here, as is the AD&D DMG.
__________________ I play and DM old-school D&D with the New York Red Box, play a shaman in a homebrew 4E campaign & write third-party and first-party stuff for that edition, and blog about all of the above at The Mule Abides.
Don't go out of your way trying to get experience with an old school style game before you run it. Download and read through a couple of the free retro-clones and start running. Those old style games are simple enough to be run without so much preparation. If you already have experience with 3.5 and all its associated complexities, then running S&W or LL won't be a problem. A lot of the fun we had back in the early days was because we just started playing without worrying about doing it "right" or "wrong" including the DM. Keep in mind that these rulesets are a framework on which you can weave the tapestry of your desired game. There are a lot of things the rules won't cover and that is by design. Have fun.
Based on that primer, a Pbp would be difficult to run. The shortcuts that "modern" systems enables would greatly benefit a Pbp moreso than a face-to-face. If you think it's time consuming to search a room in face to face gaming the way his example shows (for example) then it would take literally weeks to do in a Pbp.
That said; while the advice in the primer is good advice, the dichotomy it sets up between old school and modern is often pretty false, and the "problems" that it describes with "modern games" are often completely strawman problems. And if you look at at gaming outside of the D&D specific mileu, a lot of what it says would seem completely backwards; many non-D&Ders would say that the "modern" problems it describes are problems specific to D&D (of older vintage, even!) and that "modern" games go a completely different direction entirely.
Then again, maybe I'm just a "modern" gamer who plays with a bit of an "old school" paradigm; but in my experience there's nothing particularly old school about the advice. It's good advice... I'm not trying to knock it on that front... it's just not endemic to "old school gaming."
I second (or fifth, or sixth) the endorsements for Swords & Wizardry, its an excellent starting point to get into (or even back into) old-school gaming. S&W is really bare bones D&D and lets you get into the game at a pace that really emphasizes the elements of old-school play detailed in the Primer.
From S&W its really easy to slowly develop it into your own custom-made houseruled game (as its often easier to add to a ruleset than take away from it). Or, if you want to explore retros with incrementally more complexity, you can move on to Labyrinth Lord or even higher with OSRIC. Conversely, if you wants things even simpler than S&W, you can go with S&W Whitebox or Microlite74.
S&W also has the advantage of having Chgowiz's excellent S&W Quickstart and Reference Sheets available, simple, highly useful quality stuff for the beginning or experienced old-school gamer.
There's also a wealth of info and goodies to be found in the old-school blogosphere. Good places to start include Grognardia, Lamentations of the Flame Princess, Jeff's Gameblog, and my own humble offering, Beyond the Black Gate (linked in my sig).
Happy Gaming!
__________________ "There are few problems a well-placed fireball cannot solve. Now, tell us more about this... orphanage?" - Balfour Grimstaff
----------
That said; while the advice in the primer is good advice, the dichotomy it sets up between old school and modern is often pretty false, and the "problems" that it describes with "modern games" are often completely strawman problems. And if you look at at gaming outside of the D&D specific mileu, a lot of what it says would seem completely backwards; many non-D&Ders would say that the "modern" problems it describes are problems specific to D&D (of older vintage, even!) and that "modern" games go a completely different direction entirely.
I only skimmed the first few pages, but based on that I would say that "modern" and "old school" as presented in the primer define a spectrum. At one end of the spectrum is rigid adherence to the rules as written, never venturing beyond them. At the other end is total freeform, completely ignoring the rules and making everything up as you go. Between those endpoints, there is a wide range of play styles.
That said, certain editions lend themselves to one style, others to another. OD&D and BECMI pretty much required you to play on what we today consider the freeform end; the rules were simply not extensive enough to support "by-the-book" play very well. 1E, 2E, and especially 3E moved away from that, shifting the center of mass steadily further toward the rules-heavy end.
Depending on whom you talk to, 4E either continues or reverses this trend. Those who argue it continues the trend point to the extensive array of powers and a sense that 4E puts rules ahead of game-world logic. Those who argue it reverses the trend point to the move away from the "unified mechanics" approach of 3E, the less all-encompassing ruleset, and the efforts to support stunts and other free-form maneuvers.
__________________ Have you ever known a person who always behaved exactly the way you expected? Real people don't stay in character.
Last edited by Dausuul; 5th November 2009 at 08:47 PM..
You know, I respect Matt Finch as an author of retro-clones, but I'm afraid his Old School Primer is only so much buncombe. Nothing about the two opposed play-styles described therein have anything at all to do with old vs. new school. To an extent, yes, he's setting up a dichotomy between using die rolls to adjudicate results and simply having the DM make a decision, but it swings a little wide of the mark to my way of thinking.
If I were running D&D 3rd edition, there would be nothing at all keeping me from allowing characters to "automatically" find secret doors and treasure troves in the event that their players described specifically how and where they search for them. Likewise, running OD&D, nothing is stopping me from handling the entire searching process with one fell Wisdom check for everybody. Neither of these things is old school or new school. They are features of the DM's play style and decision making process.
Old school and new school, rather, are things inherent to the game system; not contingent on the DM and players sitting down to play the game.
The sharpest divide between "old" and "modern" gaming is simply this: how detailed to the rules make a character? How different is one character from another in game-mechanical terms?
In an old-school game, character's aren't built; they're generated (by rolling dice), after which they grow organically along a more-or-less predetermined path. Two characters with the same class and level will look quite like each other, from a game-rules perspective, for most of the course of the game. If you strip away such variables as spells known and magical equipment, the only thing that differentiates one fighter from another, or even one magic-user from another, is how the player chooses to describe the character -- something that goes quite beyond the rules of any RPG, no matter how detailed.
Conversely, in a new school game, the order of the day is player customization and having features relevant to the game rules themselves actually representing how the player wants to describe his character. The player can arrange his stats or buy them with points, and then things like skills, feats, and powers are selected to match the player's vision of his character.
An "old school" fighter has nothing but his six ability scores and maybe a list of weapon proficiencies; if this character is to be a "gladiator" or a "knight" or a "swashbuckler", it all falls on how the player equips and describes the character. A "new school" fighter would rather have feats and such which are appropriate to the character concept, and as the player levels up, more features are built on this to further customize the character.
THAT is the heart of old vs. new school. Nothing more.
I only skimmed the first few pages, but based on that I would say that "modern" and "old school" as presented in the primer define a spectrum. At one end of the spectrum is rigid adherence to the rules as written, never venturing beyond them. At the other end is total freeform, completely ignoring the rules and making everything up as you go. Between those endpoints, there is a wide range of play styles.
Yes, I realize that, but my point is that labeling either endpoint on that spectrum "old school" or "new school" is false. Also, as a guy who wandered as a prodigal son through the latte-set gamer crowd for quite some time in the 90s, I find it odd that the primer specifically espouses as "old school" concepts that many anti-D&Ders would rather see as reactions in the hobby overall against D&D. It's especially ironic that they're now being appropriated by the old school D&D movement as integral to the playstyle.
If I were running D&D 3rd edition, there would be nothing at all keeping me from allowing characters to "automatically" find secret doors and treasure troves in the event that their players described specifically how and where they search for them. Likewise, running OD&D, nothing is stopping me from handling the entire searching process with one fell Wisdom check for everybody. Neither of these things is old school or new school. They are features of the DM's play style and decision making process.
The difference here is that your 3rd Ed game experience would be realized by ignoring written rules whereas your OD&D game would involve creating rules to suit your style.
For "old school" all the ones mentioned have a lot to offer, so read them over. They all have free PDF versions available, so that isn't hard to do.
Personally, if I were to go full old school I would go BFRPG or Labyrinth Lord.
You may also want to check out "new" old school flavor games such as the new Hackmaster or Castles and Crusades.
A large part of the reason I own print copies of these "old school" games is because I use Castles and Crusades, so I can house rule everything and anything I like from any version, including house rules I have from 3E and 4E D&D, and the system holds up well.
Basic Fantasy RPG fits my tastes most closely, though. Labyrinth Lord is a very close second.
Swords and Wizardry is also good, but I would have to significantly rewrite the spell lists to be happier with it. Plus I really hate the no spells at first level thing, so that is one of the first things I would get rid of. Thats probably because I started playing with 1E, and then went back to the little brown books, then went to Basic D&D. So to me spellcasters know how to cast spells immediately, not at second level.
However, all the systems I mention hold up well to house ruling, so anything you don't like is easily fixable, and unlike with 3E and 4E, you won't have a string of effects across the board effecting strings of various skills/feats/powers.
Have fun.
__________________ It is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important. NEVER hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule book upon you, IF it goes against the obvious intent of the game. As you hew the line with respect to conformity to major systems and uniformity of play in general, also be certain the game is mastered by you and not by your players. Within the broad parameters give in the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons Volumes, YOU are creator and final arbiter. By ordering things as they should be, the game as a WHOLE first, your CAMPAIGN next, and your participants thereafter, you will be playing Advanced Dungeons and Dragons as it was meant to be. May you find as much pleasure in so doing as the rest of us do.
The difference here is that your 3rd Ed game experience would be realized by ignoring written rules whereas your OD&D game would involve creating rules to suit your style.
Are you suggesting that poking a trap door with a 10' pole in a D&D3 game would not spring the trap door open like it would in a OD&D game? You're suggesting that *only* rolling a Search check would find the trap door?
Or that the D&D3 rules say a Player must argue with his DM about a ruling (not covered in the book), but the OD&D rules say a Player will not argue about a ruling (not covered in the book)?
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
