BrOSR

[PHATsakk43]

Well, Let's see what all the shouting was about with a dive into the first real content of Brozer. The opening chapter is listed in the Table of Contents in all caps with and asterisk and a footnote, so maybe we will finally learn more about Brozer and how to run this game system. The asterisk and footnote are rather boring, just a statement that a print version of Brozer is available, at cost. At no point is it stated where you can get one of these.

Explaining or at least detailing the game isn't really what this chapter seems to be getting at. It does seem to be trying to establish a villain—an often-overlooked literary element in most of the game rules products I've read before—which is apparently subscription-based games.

We also start off with probably the worst dog whistle in the pamphlet:

The true Common Good, contrary to the collectivist chants of zombies and globalists, consists of those goods which are not reduced by being distributed.​

Now, I'm not sure if our authors of this particular chapter are tossing out "globalists" in its often antisemitic utilization or if this is just a poor attempt at being edgy for the sake of being edgy. Well, as I said before, it throws it out there, and doesn't go back to that same well again. The rest of the two pages that make up the chapter spend the majority of the first weirdly attacking the capitalism of the gaming industry. Game products, the authors explain, are difficult to monetize in their traditional forms, but that finally with subscription services the evil companies have finally found a way to do just this. So, apparently all this weird anarcho-socialist discussion is just to answer the question posed by the chapter title. It’s free because it simply should be. We even get allusion that the OSR and the broader RPG creator community DIY ethic is akin to the Punk movement—a reasonable argument as well. This almost feels like a tip of the hat to non-BrOSR creators—at least those who aren’t employed by shareholder owned corporations. Although it does seem to raise a question, “how subversive is it to be making guerrilla product if “Big RPG” isn’t profitable to begin with?” Ultimately, we're told, they are providing it for free, because RPGs are supposed to be free. Well, I suppose I wasn't expecting this sort of a sentiment given how we've started.

After 3/4s of the first page establishing the "why" we get to the "what" where the term Braunstein is introduced and that this document you are reading is, in fact, a Braunstein. The last paragraph is the first discussion of what the game will fundamentally look and play like:

A Braunstein is a game, or, more properly, a mode of play that involves multiple actors operating in conflict under a fog of war that pits players against one another in a highly fluid and dynamic RPG environment of thrilling chaos. This modal chaos is endemic to the game—it cannot be removed through railroaded modules like can be done with conventional D&D. And, it is precisely this player vs player chaos that gives any Braunstein (INCLUDING THIS ONE!) its replayability. The same scenario will play out significantly differently every time it is played.​

Well, this pretty much sounds like the description of the Braunstein that viewers of Secrets of Blackmoor would have heard about. We also get some more side-eye towards railroads, not that these types of games are without detractors outside of the BrOSR.

Speaking of Secrets of Blackmoor, the next page starts discussing the history of this style of game with a few paragraphs talking about Dave Wesely. We close by returning to the theme established by the chapter title, in which we're told that the BrOSR community (first mention of the BrOSR as well) has compiled this ruleset and decided to distribute freely as a social good and additionally to honor Dave Wesely.

It would be nice if the BrOSR was defined in some manner, as it would also clear up some confusion that we've had here in this thread, but alas, we are simply told the BrOSR exists, and it has determined that Braunstein play is correct, and that Brozer is a way to experience this for yourself.

So, two pages with a troubling start, some incongruent economic philosophy, a touch of history, and a return to self-congratulatory rhetoric. We also get a single paragraph that does, actually provide a limited explanation of what sort of game that will be described as we keep going.

Since we’ve actually been given some information, I’ll say that it does indeed seem to be implying a an emphasis on PvP, which in turn suggests this is just war gaming in a funny suit. The tone also has stopped being actually political, but cosplay political. Sort of speaking in terms that is oft associated with totalitarian propaganda but discussing an inane topic like the “correct” way to play TTRPGs. I’ve seen this sort of thing before, in the EVE Online community, especially the Goonswarm and SA boards. It’s kayfabe politics. That said, in my experience in a corp that was small and completely non-Goon aligned, there ends up being some folks who end up getting high on their own supply. Also, others who aren’t really joking, but it’s hard to necessarily tell off-color joke from bigotry when everyone is cosplaying a bigot.

Next, we are going to get our first chapter of gameplay.

 

[NN]

That looks interesting, but a few of the low star reviews worry me. Specifically the one that says the author talks about playing war games, but ignoring terrain and attributing that style of play to Gary. I may be mistaken, but as I recall, Gary had a sand table. So he very specifically used terrain. So, uh... yeah.

Check out some of the 5* reviews

Alan Purchaser Oct 12, 2024 ​

The elites don't want you to know this, but the Braunstein mode of play is the secret to ongoing and engaging campaigns that really grab the interest and creativity of your players!
I downloaded BROZER and like magic it gave me enough XP to finally move past pimply skin and weak arms! I'm now happily married to a super model who I've had four kids with already! Amazing!

 

[PHATsakk43]

Check out some of the 5* reviews

Alan Purchaser Oct 12, 2024 ​

The elites don't want you to know this, but the Braunstein mode of play is the secret to ongoing and engaging campaigns that really grab the interest and creativity of your players!
I downloaded BROZER and like magic it gave me enough XP to finally move past pimply skin and weak arms! I'm now happily married to a super model who I've had four kids with already! Amazing!

As I mentioned in my last post, this really reminds me of the hyperbole in the old SA forums.

This level of self-congratulatory rhetoric is probably the only consistent theme in the whole Brozer pamphlet. So far, every chapter is authored independently.

I suppose if nothing else, it’s a great example of why style guides and good editing is vital.

It also makes the distinction between designer and developers clearer. In the next chapter, we really see a game design discussed, but completely lacking in development. I’ll not spoil any more, and will hopefully get my next post up today, but tonight is game night so I’ll probably be busy DM’ing.

 

[PHATsakk43]

Well, I feel rather miserable committing to reviewing Brozer now. Having read it, looking at it again and again has truly become a slog for me. I'll admit, there are some interesting bits and good concepts, but it is poorly organized. I also took a bit of a break due to recent Reading D&D Aloud podcast by Ben Riggs which featured Jon Peterson which sheds some light on several of the points that Jeffro & Co are making about this whole endeavor. I ultimately didn’t change this writeup, but if it keeps going, it will be something that I will likely visit.

So, on to the next chapter. Finally, this one seems promising, "Running Your First Faction Braunstein," which implies that we will finally be getting some meat on the bones we've been promised in the past bit. For those of you keeping track, this chapter starts on page 10 and runs through 15, making it, I believe, the longest single chapter in the pamphlet.

Since this chapter is focused (somewhat, I'll get to that in a minute) on running the game, I'll try to minimize my comments regarding the tone of the writing to instead attempt to assess the rules, or guidelines, or suggestions, as they really don't end up being very explicit. I will though, point a few things that did stand out other than the game information.

First, this chapter is written by Jeffro Jackson who has been mentioned several times in this thread. He seems to be closely associated with BrOSR stuff, so that isn't too odd. One thing that is reminiscent of the previous chapter is about all the first page is like the previous. Grandiose, self-congratulatory, and generally harkening back to a simpler, more glorious past, at least in gaming. That said, Mr. Jackson’s prose is far more pleasing than our previous author’s—a Mr. Mamola and “Contorted Trash”—it does have a tinge of superiority to it. Well, less superior than say, insightful I suppose. There is an almost Gygaxian voice in the writing. Mr. Jackson is showing you the way to join in his enlightened gaming, don’t you want to come along?

As for quibbles, well, the only one that irked me particularly was Mr. Jackson’s repeated use of “Major” when referencing David Wesely, as in “Major Wesely”. I’m not sure if this was some sort of appeal to authority or that it gave Dave Wesely the aura of a 19th century British officer in a pith helmet running Braunsteins with his mates at the Cairo officers mess. Either way, as vet myself, it would bug the crap out of me to be referred to as “Machinist Mate 1st Class PHATsakk43” by someone today; the name is Nate, or Mr. PHATsakk43 if we’re being formal, I suppose. Either way, I found it cringy. Then again, I find a lot of this sort of stuff to be cringy, so that may be part of it. Also, you don’t need to thank me for my service, I volunteered and was paid well for what I did. Anyway, I’ve digressed enough, on to the, uh, the ‘rules’ as they are.

This chapter finally does discuss what Brozer is, how to run it (sorta, we’ll get to that later), and the objectives. That most of the 6 pages are at least tentatively related to game play, there is still far more history (much of it rehashed), smug rhetoric, and general, conversational narrative between the audience and Jeffro for my preference. Ultimately, Jeffro seems to imply that you’re going to be winging this and what you get is a barebones overview. Which I suppose would be fine if this was an established game that we had a full grasp of and this is just a variant. It really isn’t, although it also isn’t as ‘revolutionary’ as the preceding hype implied either. You end up with something that is both underwhelming, underdeveloped, scant, and yet still remarkably drawn-out—primarily in areas that are not particularly helpful or pertinent.

As for the gameplay, we are told in a tabulated list three modes of play. Each mode is described in roughly a paragraph and honestly, by the time you’ve read through this much discussion, you can probably figure these out on your own. Fundamental gameplay is the same regardless of method chosen. Basically, each player has opportunities to discuss directly with the GM what they are doing. The players also can do whatever they want amongst themselves. It is this latter action that supposedly sets the game apart, as while the characters are doing what they think are the best course of action, some of the information available to them may not be accurate. The GM is the ultimate arbiter, which creates a “fog of war” situation for everyone playing. Fundamentally, this is not a PvE game either; the reason the game is ‘fun’ is because the players are trying to increase their personal power vis-à-vis each other more so than solely in an absolute sense. While there isn’t anything necessarily stopping all the players simply joining together and running a dungeon, we’re told that this is wrong-play and instead we should encourage the players shanking each other. Apparently, cooperative play has been the reason no one enjoyed D&D for the past 50 years. Who knew?

Method I is a freeform game where players meet with the GM to describe their individual actions, and the rest of the group is just doing whatever they want. Timekeeping is fluid, i.e. arbitrary and up to the GM, and ultimately all the plots and schemes are sorta thrown together at some point based on the fiat of the GM as to when and where things occur. The downsides are described as potential of players with less initiative to effectively be left out. The supposed benefits are that a game can be ran in a single session.

Method II is more structured, in that each player writes down their actions which are turned into the GM, the GM then privately brings the players one by one to discuss while the rest are plotting and scheming amongst themselves. We’re told that this is fairer to players, but less so for the GM who now must do something for everyone. We’re also told that if a player isn’t available to play, we can’t run the game. Although since screwing each other over is the basis of play, I’m not sure why this is suddenly sacrosanct. Also, this isn’t particularly new. This is just Diplomacy with D&D rules for outcome determination.

Method III is to attach the game to the real-world calendar. The idea is that everyone is just sending PMs to the GM constantly as they come up with ideas as well as amongst themselves. Supposedly this is the hardest for the GM but can scale to handle large numbers of players. The difficulty of playing ends up being upon the players themselves as well, so both players and GMs burn out. Well, Jeffro, you’re not really selling this one at all.

After the methods are discussed, we’re given a bunch more narrative of play that in a normal set of game rules would be how the game works, but not with Brozer. We’re pretty much left in the dark regarding any of that and just given broad strokes about potential pitfalls (players not trying to shank each other) and an equally broad outline of plot and game development as it relates to running things. Basically, you’re told,” you’ll know when it’s time” cause all the private schemes of the players to erupt upon each other which will be something of a relief valve on the tension that has been building since last we had such a release. Basically, if this was a poker game, at some point, the GM has everyone stop betting and throw their cards on the table. That is pretty much the extent of gameplay advice we're given.

 

[Nikosandros]

Check out some of the 5* reviews

Alan Purchaser Oct 12, 2024 ​

The elites don't want you to know this, but the Braunstein mode of play is the secret to ongoing and engaging campaigns that really grab the interest and creativity of your players!
I downloaded BROZER and like magic it gave me enough XP to finally move past pimply skin and weak arms! I'm now happily married to a super model who I've had four kids with already! Amazing!

This looks fake to me. I mean, where does he find the time to game with four young kids at the same time?

 

[Mannahnin]

Well, I feel rather miserable committing to reviewing Brozer now. Having read it, looking at it again and again has truly become a slog for me. I'll admit, there are some interesting bits and good concepts, but it is poorly organized. I also took a bit of a break due to recent Reading D&D Aloud podcast by Ben Riggs which featured Jon Peterson which sheds some light on several of the points that Jeffro & Co are making about this whole endeavor. I ultimately didn’t change this writeup, but if it keeps going, it will be something that I will likely visit.

Thanks for taking the bullet for us; I'll thank you for THAT service. And for reminding me that JP's appearing in the episode. I know what I'm listening to later...

First, this chapter is written by Jeffro Jackson

[sotto voce] (Johnson)

 

[PHATsakk43]

This looks fake to me. I mean, where does he find the time to game with four young kids at the same time?

I've got a 3-year-old and a 7-month-old, so I agree with this sentiment.

 

[Autumnal]

I’m im staring with horrified fascination. Thank you for your service.

 

[TiQuinn]

Well, I feel rather miserable committing to reviewing Brozer now. Having read it, looking at it again and again has truly become a slog for me. I'll admit, there are some interesting bits and good concepts, but it is poorly organized. I also took a bit of a break due to recent Reading D&D Aloud podcast by Ben Riggs which featured Jon Peterson which sheds some light on several of the points that Jeffro & Co are making about this whole endeavor. I ultimately didn’t change this writeup, but if it keeps going, it will be something that I will likely visit.

So, on to the next chapter. Finally, this one seems promising, "Running Your First Faction Braunstein," which implies that we will finally be getting some meat on the bones we've been promised in the past bit. For those of you keeping track, this chapter starts on page 10 and runs through 15, making it, I believe, the longest single chapter in the pamphlet.

Since this chapter is focused (somewhat, I'll get to that in a minute) on running the game, I'll try to minimize my comments regarding the tone of the writing to instead attempt to assess the rules, or guidelines, or suggestions, as they really don't end up being very explicit. I will though, point a few things that did stand out other than the game information.

First, this chapter is written by Jeffro Jackson who has been mentioned several times in this thread. He seems to be closely associated with BrOSR stuff, so that isn't too odd. One thing that is reminiscent of the previous chapter is about all the first page is like the previous. Grandiose, self-congratulatory, and generally harkening back to a simpler, more glorious past, at least in gaming. That said, Mr. Jackson’s prose is far more pleasing than our previous author’s—a Mr. Mamola and “Contorted Trash”—it does have a tinge of superiority to it. Well, less superior than say, insightful I suppose. There is an almost Gygaxian voice in the writing. Mr. Jackson is showing you the way to join in his enlightened gaming, don’t you want to come along?

As for quibbles, well, the only one that irked me particularly was Mr. Jackson’s repeated use of “Major” when referencing David Wesely, as in “Major Wesely”. I’m not sure if this was some sort of appeal to authority or that it gave Dave Wesely the aura of a 19th century British officer in a pith helmet running Braunsteins with his mates at the Cairo officers mess. Either way, as vet myself, it would bug the crap out of me to be referred to as “Machinist Mate 1st Class PHATsakk43” by someone today; the name is Nate, or Mr. PHATsakk43 if we’re being formal, I suppose. Either way, I found it cringy. Then again, I find a lot of this sort of stuff to be cringy, so that may be part of it. Also, you don’t need to thank me for my service, I volunteered and was paid well for what I did. Anyway, I’ve digressed enough, on to the, uh, the ‘rules’ as they are.

This chapter finally does discuss what Brozer is, how to run it (sorta, we’ll get to that later), and the objectives. That most of the 6 pages are at least tentatively related to game play, there is still far more history (much of it rehashed), smug rhetoric, and general, conversational narrative between the audience and Jeffro for my preference. Ultimately, Jeffro seems to imply that you’re going to be winging this and what you get is a barebones overview. Which I suppose would be fine if this was an established game that we had a full grasp of and this is just a variant. It really isn’t, although it also isn’t as ‘revolutionary’ as the preceding hype implied either. You end up with something that is both underwhelming, underdeveloped, scant, and yet still remarkably drawn-out—primarily in areas that are not particularly helpful or pertinent.

As for the gameplay, we are told in a tabulated list three modes of play. Each mode is described in roughly a paragraph and honestly, by the time you’ve read through this much discussion, you can probably figure these out on your own. Fundamental gameplay is the same regardless of method chosen. Basically, each player has opportunities to discuss directly with the GM what they are doing. The players also can do whatever they want amongst themselves. It is this latter action that supposedly sets the game apart, as while the characters are doing what they think are the best course of action, some of the information available to them may not be accurate. The GM is the ultimate arbiter, which creates a “fog of war” situation for everyone playing. Fundamentally, this is not a PvE game either; the reason the game is ‘fun’ is because the players are trying to increase their personal power vis-à-vis each other more so than solely in an absolute sense. While there isn’t anything necessarily stopping all the players simply joining together and running a dungeon, we’re told that this is wrong-play and instead we should encourage the players shanking each other. Apparently, cooperative play has been the reason no one enjoyed D&D for the past 50 years. Who knew?

Method I is a freeform game where players meet with the GM to describe their individual actions, and the rest of the group is just doing whatever they want. Timekeeping is fluid, i.e. arbitrary and up to the GM, and ultimately all the plots and schemes are sorta thrown together at some point based on the fiat of the GM as to when and where things occur. The downsides are described as potential of players with less initiative to effectively be left out. The supposed benefits are that a game can be ran in a single session.

Method II is more structured, in that each player writes down their actions which are turned into the GM, the GM then privately brings the players one by one to discuss while the rest are plotting and scheming amongst themselves. We’re told that this is fairer to players, but less so for the GM who now must do something for everyone. We’re also told that if a player isn’t available to play, we can’t run the game. Although since screwing each other over is the basis of play, I’m not sure why this is suddenly sacrosanct. Also, this isn’t particularly new. This is just Diplomacy with D&D rules for outcome determination.

Method III is to attach the game to the real-world calendar. The idea is that everyone is just sending PMs to the GM constantly as they come up with ideas as well as amongst themselves. Supposedly this is the hardest for the GM but can scale to handle large numbers of players. The difficulty of playing ends up being upon the players themselves as well, so both players and GMs burn out. Well, Jeffro, you’re not really selling this one at all.

After the methods are discussed, we’re given a bunch more narrative of play that in a normal set of game rules would be how the game works, but not with Brozer. We’re pretty much left in the dark regarding any of that and just given broad strokes about potential pitfalls (players not trying to shank each other) and an equally broad outline of plot and game development as it relates to running things. Basically, you’re told,” you’ll know when it’s time” cause all the private schemes of the players to erupt upon each other which will be something of a relief valve on the tension that has been building since last we had such a release. Basically, if this was a poker game, at some point, the GM has everyone stop betting and throw their cards on the table. That is pretty much the extent of gameplay advice we're given.

This feels almost like kids playing “Cops and Robbers” where one kid is always shouting what the rules are (the biggest kid, the oldest kid, the loudest kid) and the game goes on for awhile until a fight happens, and someone goes home crying.