D&D General 5e D&D to OSR pipeline or circle?

[Sacrosanct]

Over the holidays, I've been giving it consideration of taking my group back to 5e, or switching to a new 5e variant (2024, ToV, or Level Up), or else going to OSR. I can't decide at all what my interest is.

I don't want it MORE complex than 5e 2014 (which probably takes out 2024, ToV, and LevelUp). I don't like the lower-power feel of most OSR systems or the diverse resolution mechanics (roll d6 for thief skills, roll high on a d20 to hit, roll low on a d20 to make a saving throw, have non-standardized ability score bonuses, etc.)

Shadow dark? Bugbears&borderlands? B&B is basically OSR feel and simplicity but with 5e unified mechanics and more PC survivability than OSR games.

 

[Retreater]

I am in the same boat, not sure ToV is more complex, you could also take a look at Shadow of the Weird Wizard. I am looking for something about 3/4 from Shadowdark to 2014 5e (and 2024 moved in the wrong direction for that…)

I am curious what Goodman Games and Mike Mearls do in their 5e variants, they might become the closest to that, but those are still some time off

I want the d20 familiarity. This is for players who haven't thought about the game for a week, won't look at rulebooks when they aren't sitting down to play, etc.
I don't want to try to teach them a new system (after beating my head against a wall to get them to understand D&D 4E, Dragonbane, and Savage Worlds.)

 

[overgeeked]

I want the d20 familiarity. This is for players who haven't thought about the game for a week, won't look at rulebooks when they aren't sitting down to play, etc.
I don't want to try to teach them a new system (after beating my head against a wall to get them to understand D&D 4E, Dragonbane, and Savage Worlds.)

OSR with (mostly) 5E mechanics? Right now your closest match is Shadowdark. The Quickstart is free on DrivethruRPG.

Though honestly, after reading all the post-mortems, it reads like you’re tilting at windmills looking for the perfect game that doesn’t exist.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I think you’ve missed my point a little. 5e is designed to engage significantly in tactical heroic combat as a core problem solving activity - thus it’s designed to give characters a lot of options and staying power. Most OSR games make combat a last-resort due to danger / relative lack of “cool buttons.” You can ignore that (the same way you can ignore the existence of concrete skills with resolution mechanics in favor of poking at things with questions), but my experience was that the 5e version of the modules simply didn’t have the same sort of play as you see people report with the OSR one.

I get that. My thought would be: don’t convert an existing OSR adventure for 5e, but to write a 5e adventure with an OSR mentality. I think that could get you closer to an OSR experience in 5e than converting.

 

[abirdcall]

I think you’ve missed my point a little. 5e is designed to engage significantly in tactical heroic combat as a core problem solving activity - thus it’s designed to give characters a lot of options and staying power. Most OSR games make combat a last-resort due to danger / relative lack of “cool buttons.” You can ignore that (the same way you can ignore the existence of concrete skills with resolution mechanics in favor of poking at things with questions), but my experience was that the 5e version of the modules simply didn’t have the same sort of play as you see people report with the OSR one.

5e has that too.

My players try to avoid combat as much as possible.

Sometimes new players will not heed the warnings of my older players and fight and then characters die or they get too tired to compete their objectives.

Just a couple sessions ago they were arrogant about fighting a couple fighters but once they did they brought the whole tower down on them and half the party died and the other have fled.

One of the new players commented that it must have been a battle they just weren't supposed to win. Which it wasn't, it was just that they couldn't just solve everything with violence.

So usually in my games players engage in social interaction and exploration as much as possible to avoid combat.

Player skill rather than character abilities is big too. They only get a chance to roll if they make good decisions. They will often just succeed but sometimes it comes down to a roll.

5e very much supports this style.

 

[Remathilis]

I think you’ve missed my point a little. 5e is designed to engage significantly in tactical heroic combat as a core problem solving activity - thus it’s designed to give characters a lot of options and staying power. Most OSR games make combat a last-resort due to danger / relative lack of “cool buttons.” You can ignore that (the same way you can ignore the existence of concrete skills with resolution mechanics in favor of poking at things with questions), but my experience was that the 5e version of the modules simply didn’t have the same sort of play as you see people report with the OSR one.

I must have missed this memo, but I tend to think the whole "OSR games make combat a last resort" line a load of bunk. I've played a lot of AD&D 1e and Basic Modules; they were full of rooms with monsters who live to roll initiative. I played more than a few Goodman Games DCC's whole prided themselves on "No NPC is unkillable" style of module design. Hackmaster mocked how forward D&D combat was, DCC-RPG mocked how forward D&D combat was. The only place I ever see people discuss how OS play was about avoiding/minimalizing combat is this board. I have come to believe this is more wishing it to be true (and constantly creating games that force it to be true) than any objective truth about OS play.

 

[mamba]

I want the d20 familiarity. This is for players who haven't thought about the game for a week, won't look at rulebooks when they aren't sitting down to play, etc.

Weird Wizard is a d20 game, but sure, if they struggle with 5e already then maybe a somewhat different take might not be helping either

 

[TiQuinn]

I disagree about 5e defeating an OSR playstyle or that it generally devolves to combat. Heck, there are even official 5e adventures that can be completely resolved without combat. Also, my group plays 5e like we played 1e. It is not that the game can’t be played that way, I think the issue is, as you pointed, people new to the game don’t know that playstyle.

However, i feel there may be a market for people familiar with that adventure style who also play 5e. Maybe I am wrong though

The reason I feel this way is that the majority of class abilities are directed towards combat. You can certainly play 5e without a combat focus but it’s not as natural a fit; you typically have abilities that are being left unused and players will gravitate to using them. I know full well that I as a player simply chose combat versus social interaction just because I was jonesing for a fight or to use a new ability.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I haven't looked at it too much. The "1 hp" wizard kinda scared me off.

While that does happen, the system won't break if you give everyone max hit points at first level. That's a very common house rule for Shadowdark.

 

[overgeeked]

While that does happen, the system won't break if you give everyone max hit points at first level. That's a very common house rule for Shadowdark.

A very common house rule for many OSR games and old-school TSR-era D&D. I'd argue it's the most common house rule. A close second is probably average hit points when you level up.