OSR A Historical Look at the OSR

[overgeeked]

Hmmm...I never played 2e, but in 1e, in the 80s, plenty of us had favorite characters that we kinda expected to continue living. Finding a temple to pay a bunch of gold to for a res was a thing in many 1e games at the time.

The big difference to me (not saying same is true for all), but in the 80s we would bring our characters from one DMs game to another. And most DMs were would just piece run a module or an adventure they prepared without any long story arcs. The whole adventure path wasn't a thing in the groups I played with.

Sure. Individual groups vary. But the shift occurred in the rules themselves in that edition change. Compare the expectations presented in AD&D vs AD&D 2E. 2E is far more story driven / focused by default.

 

[Akrasia]

I don’t think 3.x is a streamlined MERP, having played both (and Rolemaster and Spacemaster).

MERP clearly influenced 3e (the classes with skills system, rolling higher is always better, etc.). The influence of MERP (and RM) should be no surprise, given that Monte Cook had worked previously for ICE. I was a huge MERP (and RM) fan back in the day and I immediately discerned the influence when I first read the 3e PHB twenty years ago.

But 3e was definitely not a "streamlined" version of anything, including MERP, given (among other things) the existence of feats. MERP was (and remains) easier and faster to run simply because it has no built in "exception-based" mechanic.

(For an excellent updated version of MERP, by the way, check out Against the Darkmaster...)

 

[Akrasia]

I was deeply involved in the initial retro-clone phase of the OSR.

From our perspective, we won. We got what we wanted. Not much else to do other than game.

Many thanks to Rogueattorney for this insightful and informative post!

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that WotC's decision to release hardback versions of the core 1e AD&D books (and the collections of S1-4 and A1-4) in 2012, as well as subsequently to make available many long out-of-print TSR works (as PDFs + POD books), was (at least in part) motivated by the success of the OSR. OSRIC, S&W, and the others showed that there was a pent-up demand for these products. Now we live in a world where these products are readily available. We owe that, I think, to the OSR. OSRIC's success has made it largely unnecessary (but not completely: the PDF and Wiki of the rules are still free, and OSRIC explains some rules, e.g., initiative, far more clearly than the original AD&D books).

I was far more distantly involved in the OSR in its “early years” (really more of a bystander). (I do have at a post at Dragonsfoot in what I believe is the first thread in which the term “Old School Renaissance” was used, coined – appropriately enough – by an anonymous poster. I also developed some house rules for S&W that eventually were incorporated into Crypts and Things.) So I found the "historical look" blog posts linked in the OP quite interesting, especially the last two part. In case anyone is interested (not that there's any reason you should be!), I have some reflections on my experience with the OSR at my blog (included on the list of “pivotal early OSR blogs” in part 5 of the “historical look”): Reflection on the Old School Renaissance

 

[infinityman]

OSR

Maybe you need to start deciding on the traits of a OSR game before deciding on when it ended. Simpler combat, high chance of death?
2e core books were fundamentally the same as 1e core books and I used 1e modules with the 2e ruleset.

Probably a better exercise for the bigger youtubers who are leading the OSR movement and have thought about it more.

You mean OS I think, OSR are newer titles. Generally once WOTC bought out TSR it's considered the end of the OS era.

 

[Mannahnin]

OSR

You mean OS I think, OSR are newer titles. Generally once WOTC bought out TSR it's considered the end of the OS era.

You might want to check out the first post and the linked series of articles. OSR as a term has certainly evolved over time, having started out purely as a revival of interest in, re-examination of play with, and the retrocloning of, older titles like AD&D 1st ed.

 

[Shakeshift]

Well, once Justin LaNasa loses the rights to everything TSR-related after his WotC lawsuit goes badly for him, you can bet he's going to try and paint himself as the originator of everything labled "OSR" as well. - He created a company called OSR Games in 2021 and if it's anything like what he did with the TSR label, he's going to shakedown every OSR producer and mansplain that if you're using HIS brand (namely, anything with OSR in the title) you're going to have to cut LaNasa a percentage of your profits or give him unrestricted access to your social media to post like he's some sort of mob godfather overseeing the whole industry.

That's what he tried doing with TSR in June of last year. He told everyone who had a Facebook page that either he got to post (without restrictions) on everyone's Facebook page OR they had to remove the "TSR" definition from their Facebook profile. It was ridiculous. He painted himself in the emails as if he were the ORIGINAL TSR Hobbies and the original creator of GenCon etc and that if you didn't comply he was going to take people to court.... and It wasn't until people started shoving back against him that Justin LaNasa finally backed down off of all of his lies after a while. Still, it was that he tried to get away with it that started the landslide against him and his company's shady dealings in the first place. Classic bullying tactic.

 

[Mannahnin]

Deleted; wrong thread!

 

[Edgar Ironpelt]

(For particular fun, in a group about that, ask them if Champions (originally published in 1981) is Old School in the earlier versions (and make no doubt, there's a distinct sort of cultural break between people who never liked a version later than 4e (or sometime 3e) and people happy playing 5e or 6e); you can sometimes get resounding silence).

I resemble that remark: I consider 4e Champions to be great, and don't like 5e or 6e. (Pre-4e editions were OK for their time, but 4e was better.)

It comes down to certain types of rule-tightening in 5e, and, yes, a cultural break - or maybe better expressed as a change in the 'philosophy' behind the rules.

I also consider Champions to not be Old School, but rather an early example of non-old-school gaming.

 

[kronovan]

This thread has evolved to be quite long by now, so I didn't have enough patience to read through all of it.

Anyhow...I started playing in 1981 with AD&D 1e and went on sabatical (1st child born) in 1987. By 87 I'd played AD&D1e+WSG, Gamma World and Traveller. While Original D&D was in my university gaming club's library, no one ran or played it by the time I joined in 83. As well, D&D variants like B/X or BECMI never got traction in my city, as LGSs were only interested in shelving AD&D as that was what the President (Gygax) of TSR was backing/writing. I didn't return to TTRPG play until the mid 2000s when 3e was the predominant edition.

To me the OSR acronymn can be read 3 ways, with each having different meaning - Old School Roleplaying, Old School Revival, Old School Renaissance.

For me Old School Roleplaying describes a common style of play that seemed to end somwhere around the mid 80's. Most folks in my community college club and private group were running the prewritten modules from TSR. For those there seemed to be a focus on adventuring, dungeon delving and treasure hunting, with a high degree of lethality. It seemed to be around 83/84 (long time ago so hard to be sure) when I was playing in my university club, that the TSR modules changed to what I'd call a more heroic style of play; i.e. more focus on narrative and PC survivability was better. At my university club and later comic shop tables, that change of style seemed to trigger a homebrew initiative. I.e. some DM's started exploring different/house rules, while others started creating highly narrative adventures/campaigns that went beyond the narrative being presented in TSR's.

Whereas Old School Revival to me best describes TTRPGs like OSRIC, Old School Essentials and Lamentation of the Flame Princess, where the authors are reviving an existing edtion, by clarifying the rules, providing good presentation and adding some options.

For me Old School Renaissance is more like Dungeon Crawl Classics. For it (and similar TTRPGs) the authors seem to be creating a hybrid that combine the OS Roleplaying style that I experienced in the early 80s, with rules and play mechanics from newer RPGs; i.e. 3e like DCs, skill bonuses and saves. Castles and Crusaders seems to be taking a similar approach, but I don't have much play time with it, so hard to be sure.

I don't know if that all makes sense, but based on my early experiences and more recent experiences, those are the ways that OSR could be described.

 

[Fenris-77]

No offense to the folks who like a detailed taxonomy, but at this point I don't feel any need to spell out the O, the S, and the R. They can happily accommodate all of the perfectly legitimate elements outlined in the post above. Our little corner of the hobby can be all three and any given player or group will probably cover slightly different bits of the overall Venn diagram. I don't think there is a lot of value in trying to carve our corner up into different bits. Tribalism and gatekeeping has already made various OSR spaces toxic and I have no desire to contribute to that. I think we should welcome all those things and enthusiastically mix them as we see fit.