BrOSR

[Bill Zebub]

I see the distinction but I think the terms are misleading. OSR people rail against the idea it's a board game. We are very much about character development. We just see the adventures as challenges for BOTH the players and the characters.

The 'like a board game' argument is a tricky one because, depending on which characteristics of board games you want to cite, it can be used by both (all) sides.

 

[Moonmover]

Interesting timing.

They've put out a free module.

 

[Emerikol]

The 'like a board game' argument is a tricky one because, depending on which characteristics of board games you want to cite, it can be used by both (all) sides.

I should type clearer. I meant rail against the accusations that what they do is a board game. But you are right. Personally, while I prefer my own style, it's uh why I play it, I accept that matters of taste really can't be disputed. We are point out why we like or dislike certain things. Others may not agree.

 

[nyvinter]

I don't think he's suggesting that narrative play is OSR. It reads to me like he's talking as if OSR isn't even a thing he's aware of! Or as if he completely missed the prevalence of Emergent Narrative over pre-planned narrative in that space. It wouldn't entirely shock me if some of Jeffro's crew came into AD&D from 3e or 5e or otherwise completely outside the OSR.

Nah. Looking at these people's twitter following and stuff, they do know OSR but they're very insular and angry so no-one bothers with them. They're more like the people who never left AD&D 1e because that was The Game As Gygax Intended and Basic and everything after is ruining his legacy.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I should type clearer. I meant rail against the accusations that what they do is a board game. But you are right. Personally, while I prefer my own style, it's uh why I play it, I accept that matters of taste really can't be disputed. We are point out why we like or dislike certain things. Others may not agree.

Well said. I personally don't lean as heavily into some facets of roleplaying as some prefer, and am perfectly happy to acknowledge that. I don't expect my players to limit their own puzzle solving abilities based on their character's Int scores. I don't insist that players act like they believe lying NPCs just because they fail an Insight check (in fact I don't use Insight as lie detection.). I don't care if 1st level characters use fire on trolls.

But when other people stick their noses in the air and say, "Oh, well, that's not REAL roleplaying..." I just kind of roll my eyes. Get a life.

P.S. @iserith is my spiritual leader here.

 

[Emerikol]

P.S. @iserith is my spiritual leader here.

I remember arguing with Iserith about all sorts of things in days gone by. At least 10 years ago but probably longer.

 

[Mannahnin]

Nah. Looking at these people's twitter following and stuff, they do know OSR but they're very insular and angry so no-one bothers with them. They're more like the people who never left AD&D 1e because that was The Game As Gygax Intended and Basic and everything after is ruining his legacy.

...except they're all younger dudes, right? None of them played it BITD.

The earliest seeds of the OSR grew in strongholds of the "never left AD&D", like the Dragonsfoot forums. That's where I first encountered the OSR, in 2009 or 2010, after I met Frank Mentzer at a convention and he recommended them. A place where at the time 3e was referred to as TETSNBN (The Edition That Shall Not Be Named) and 4E as YAETSNBN. Those dudes (there were a few women, but my recollection is that they were more chill) might have resented WotC and later editions, but they were legitimately carrying on some gaming practices from BITD. Albeit most of them had certainly evolved at least a little and been influenced by newer games, made house rules, etc., over the prior (at the time two) decades.

 

[nyvinter]

...except they're all younger dudes, right? None of them played it BITD.

Quite frankly? I'm not sure. Logic says they should be younger but then one looks at what they write and their opinions and how they present them, and even what kind of media they consume and champion, and they seem to have a brain from the 1950s* that just can't cope with things progressing further than 1978. It's weird.

But it's also fairly obvious that they haven't really played any of the modern versions.

*) No offence meant to people born in the 50s, I'm sure you've matured and changed with the times.
---
And from what I've gathered one can't just say "the playstyle from BITD" as if there were just one. Have heard far too many first hand tales from people in 70s games that were very different from what OSR evolved into.

 

[Mannahnin]

Quite frankly? I'm not sure. Logic says they should be younger but then one looks at what they write and their opinions and how they present them, and even what kind of media they consume and champion, and they seem to have a brain from the 1950s* that just can't cope with things progressing further than 1978. It's weird.

But it's also fairly obvious that they haven't really played any of the modern versions.

Young reactionaries are a thing, alas.

And from what I've gathered one can't just say "the playstyle from BITD" as if there were just one. Have heard far too many first hand tales from people in 70s games that were very different from what OSR evolved into.

Absolutely true. Play styles were varied and arguably more fragmented because inter-group communication wasn't as easy pre-internet. The Elusive Shift gives a good look at contemporary fan discussions in zines and other publications.

 

[Moonmover]

...except they're all younger dudes, right? None of them played it BITD.

The YouTube playlist I linked in an earlier post consists of videos made by a man who definitely looks to be in his 50's or 60's. That doesn't necessarily mean he played back in the day of course, nor does it tell you must about anybody else involved.