OSR Is there room in modern gaming for the OSR to bring in new gamers?

[Shardstone]

5E is a fun game that ive played in a hundred different ways. It isnt the best programming language but it is a good one.

 

[Gradine]

Some like to call this the "paradox of tolerance," but I prefer to call it the challenge of respect. In order to have a place where people are genuinely respectful of one another, or at least actively avoid disrespectful behavior, you cannot permit disrespectful behavior, not even on the grounds that it is more respectful to be patient and forgiving when folks are disrespectful.

You'll find that the "paradox of tolerance" ceases to be a paradox at all when you accept "tolerance" as a social contract instead of an absolute law.

 

[MockingBird]

I get some of the frustrations, I've seen numerous people refer to 5e as an apology edition. I don't really get it, or get how an apology edition becomes wildly successful. Seems like a term to downplay the edition. It's annoying, so I can kind of see what you mean when the thin red line is being tip toed on.

 

[Clint_L]

That's a valid point, but it isn't by virtue of 5e being a good game to DM - it's by virtue of 5e being a very easy game to find a group for due to its popularity. So it really doesn't say anything about whether learning how to DM through 5e's sourcebooks give you the necessary tools to become a good GM.

So? I am making a practical argument about what will get them playing, not a subjective argument about which version's sourcebooks are best to learn to DM from. If they have no one to play with, nothing else matters.

And absolutely you can learn a lot of stuff and be a good GM by winging it and learning from experience. But why waste so much time ...

Because at least you will have people to play with. A 14 year old isn't going to get a lot of takers on their 1e or Basic campaign, so arguing about which is better is pointless.

The outcome I am looking for is kids who can play the game and have friends to play with. There's only one realistic choice. It's not about me or my taste, it's about what will work best for them.

Though at a practical level, I also very much disagree that those earlier systems are easier to learn on, anyway.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

You'll find that the "paradox of tolerance" ceases to be a paradox at all when you accept "tolerance" as a social contract instead of an absolute law.

Social contract theory is pretty flawed though. Nobody signs the contract. That's...kind of the very foundation of contract theory, that someone had to actively give consent in some way. "I was born in this place" cannot qualify.

 

[Umbran]

Wow. So many folks who apparently really want to jump in and rehash old hurts.

Might be time to consider not perpetuating pain going forward.

 

[pemerton]

Social contract theory is pretty flawed though. Nobody signs the contract. That's...kind of the very foundation of contract theory, that someone had to actively give consent in some way. "I was born in this place" cannot qualify.

Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Rawls, etc are not so stupid as to have supposed that anyone ever signed a social contract.

There are a lot of different purposes that social contract analysis is used for. Depending on what those purposes are, there are different sorts of objections that can be made. That nobody signs isn't a very powerful one.

 

[MichaelSomething]

OSR can certainly grow if people are willing to put in the leg work in promoting it. For example, I bet there isn't any TikTok content about OSR games at all! That just leaving proverbial money on the table!

 

[SkidAce]

Who on the 5E staff says this "straight-up .... to your face".

If you are making statements like this, and accusing people, you should back that up with dates, and the exact wording.

Also, as far as Gnomes being unimportant, wasn't 4E the edition where Gnomes were just wiped off the face of the Forgotten Realms?

"I'm a monster now...RAWR!"

 

[MoonSong]

This isn't, though. Dragonborn aren't specific to 4e (they're just re-named half-Dragons from 3e) and even if they are, they're something that IMO should never have been PC-playable. Even so, they came forward into 5e anyway, so that designer clearly lost the battle.

This is inaccurate, yes Dragonborn come from late 3.x, but they aren't renamed Half-dragons. They come from a semi-obscure supplement called Races of the Dragon. There they are called "Dragonborn of Bahamut", but instead of a true breeding race, they are part of the trans-human races that were popular with designers by then. (They were humans who made a ritual to Bahamut and became draconic as a result)