OSR What Has Caused the OSR Revival?

Zardnaar · Nov 27, 2013

There are over 20 OSR type clones and retro games now. I suppose one could blame the OGL but the OGL has been around for a long time now. The 1st few clones AFAIK started to pop up in the 3.5 era (2004 for Castels and Crusades?) but they seem to have exploded in number over the last 2-3 years. On Dragonsfoot.org there are often threads along the lines of ex 3rd and sometimes 4th ed players returning to AD&D.

I'm not 100% sure but I know that I am not the only 3.x player who has gone back to OSR games. I spent 12 years playing 3.x games but I do not think I have played 3.5 since 2009 and Pathfinder for about a year. Most of my players are d20 er players but they will try various retroclones and AD&D games although they like it if I flip AC to ascending numbers and use BAB instead of THAC0.

So s the revival an alliance between the grogs who stuck with TSR era players married to an influx of 3rd and even 4th ed players due to the fracturing of the fanbase. Or a number of grogs being larger or better organized than they were a few years ago or something else?

Nagol · Nov 27, 2013

My guess is a combination of nostalgia and a contrary reaction to comprehensive/fiddly rule sets.

delericho · Nov 27, 2013

It turns out there was a pent-up, unmet demand. And once OSRIC demonstrated that it was possible to legally provide support for those old editions, it quickly became apparent that there was that demand - and companies provided support accordingly.

It's all pretty cool, actually.

Scorpio616 · Nov 27, 2013

OSR was a reaction to modern game design. Overly complex rulesets that forgot who was running the game. Ging back to when if spell 'xxxx' was going to be a problem for the campaign, the GM was expected not to let the spell into the game.

delericho said:
And once OSRIC demonstrated that it was possible to legally provide support for those old editions,

Was that ever actually proven in court? What I remember reading was a WoTC employee asked the OSRIC guy to stop, OSRIC guy said no, and wotc didn't pursue the matter due to the OSRIC guy being in the UK.

Minigiant · Nov 27, 2013

Basically nostalgia, a demand with little supply, a supply of products that didn't scratch a certain itch, and sudden ease of recreation. Also the modern games did provide ideas for fixing the issues and complaints of the older games. while at the same time many gamers already had their own fixes and houserules for systems which fewer moving parts.

Demand + Nostalgia + Ease + 20+ years of gaming to steal from.

MJS · Nov 27, 2013

I agree it is mainly just unmet demand. I know several DM's who never even switched to 2E, and are still running their games dating to the 70's and 80's.
Same with PF really.
but, I disagree on the nostalgia. People don't play B/X , or AD&D, or even PF, out of nostalgia. They play those editions because they are hugely fun, and were never "broken" to begin with. Rules quirks people disagree with are expected to be modified - it's not as if 3E gave birth to dwarf paladins and etc.

delericho · Nov 27, 2013

Scorpio616 said:
Was that ever actually proven in court?

In court? No, I don't think so. But the OSRIC team had taken legal advice, and they were very sure of where they stood. They may, of course, have been wrong about that, but WotC chose not to test it. Which was probably wise - I suspect any potential gains would have been dwarfed by the resultant loss of goodwill, especially at a time when WotC had no interest in supporting the old editions themselves.

Jester David · Nov 27, 2013

Zardnaar said:
The 1st few clones AFAIK started to pop up in the 3.5 era (2004 for Castels and Crusades?) but they seem to have exploded in number over the last 2-3 years.
So is the revival an alliance between the grogs who stuck with TSR era players married to an influx of 3rd and even 4th ed players due to the fracturing of the fanbase. Or a number of grogs being larger or better organized than they were a few years ago or something else?

I think there are a few factors.

First, there are the people who didn't like 4e but wanted something other than 3e (or Pathfinder when it came out).

Second, the changes of 4e sparked a bit of nostalgia. As the song goes, you don't know what you've got 'till it's gone. After the changes of 4e a lot of fans might have suddenly realized they liked certain mechanics or bits of flavour.

Third, there was PF itself showing people it was possible to play D&D without actually playing the latest edition. This helped validate OSR games as a viable option.

Fourth, the growth of the internet and PDF publishing has helped. It's been around for a while but has really taken off for RPGs, especially with e-readers and tablets. Thinks makes non-physical OSR games easier to play.

Fifth is critical mass. There's enough players and versions that the games get more attention. And by getting more attention more people play, which increases their attention.

MJS · Nov 27, 2013

Off a tangent from ^
I believe it was found that "hobbit" actually does predate Tolkien in folklore, but no one AFAIK has dared challenge it

Dunnagin · Nov 27, 2013

Many people probably have less time to play once they get older, have a full time job, family, etc.

Older editions do tend to be easier to DM.

Combine those two things are you have a ready made market for old school materials.

Add a third factor, which is that most of the retro clones and alternate versions are actually free to download... and you have a widespread effect.

That's my assessment anyway.