OSR A Historical Look at the OSR

[Thomas Shey]

Never played either system.

I do know that Traveler's character creation system is...unique. As in, "Hey, I just died in character creation" unique.

Runequest is the one that anthropomorphic ducks as a player race, correct? Hard pass.

It does, though that's a pretty minor element of the setting. You could go a long time playing RQ without seeing one of those. It was (originally) very setting specific, though.

 

[Malmuria]

Ironically, the original edition of Bunnies and Burrows had a lot more to do with what the author considers the core elements of "Old School" than I think he's giving it credit for.

Yeah... I appreciate that those posts have so many citations to things like blog and forum posts, but reading in between the lines the authors seems to want to constrain OSR to correspond to an evergreen AD&D 1e game (he indicates a split between the b/x/OSE rules lite segment of the OSR and the 1e players).

 

[Mannahnin]

Ironically, the original edition of Bunnies and Burrows had a lot more to do with what the author considers the core elements of "Old School" than I think he's giving it credit for.

I don't think he would argue otherwise. I think he's pointing out that the disparity between B&B and, say, Teenagers from Outer Space (which I also have and enjoyed making characters for as an adolescent) is so broad that saying they're both Old School really says nothing about the games themselves other than that they're old. They don't share a "school".

Yeah... I appreciate that those posts have so many citations to things like blog and forum posts, but reading in between the lines the authors seems to want to constrain OSR to correspond to an evergreen AD&D 1e game (he indicates a split between the b/x/OSE rules lite segment of the OSR and the 1e players).

OSR started off meaning one thing, and has gradually broadened over time, to the point where some ways the term is used are semantically pretty meaningless. People lament this in places like the OSR Reddit pretty regularly. That it's become a marketing term used indiscriminately.

For my part I think "mechanically compatible with old school D&D" is a useful thing to be shorthand for, but I tend to conceptualize the OSR at least a little more broadly than JUST that.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

It has beens said that 2e isn't really old school even if published by TSR. The removal of XPs for treasures and the shift to a more campaign arc oriented play and less sandbox being the major reasons.

?It's been said?

2e is not old school.

Arguably, anything from UA on in 1e (and certainly anything post-85, when you got DSG and WSG) is not old school.

I think very credible arguments can be made that anything after 1983 cannot even be considered old school when it comes to D&D, with the best dividing line being the publication of I6 Ravenloft at the end of '83.

 

[John R Davis]

For me Old School games have the answer in your mind not on your character sheet.
So few skills, lots making it up, more narration.....not I roll skill X

 

[Thomas Shey]

I don't think he would argue otherwise. I think he's pointing out that the disparity between B&B and, say, Teenagers from Outer Space (which I also have and enjoyed making characters for as an adolescent) is so broad that saying they're both Old School really says nothing about the games themselves other than that they're old. They don't share a "school".

Not the takeaway I got, which was "D&D is not like these other things." It really is like B&B in many ways (and I think I'd make an argument that it was more like original Traveler than I suspect he's giving it credit for, too). Gamma World/Metamorphosis Alpha were too. You can certainly draw a thematic line between all of those and the other games on the list, but unless the definition is as much about mechanics as theme and approach, separating off the other four doesn't make much sense (Traveler perhaps a bit more than the other three) unless you're just privledging D&D for "reasons".

 

[kenada]

Absolutely. Though, honestly, no one in that thread was as aggressive as I've seen some OS proponents being, but that's probably the "besieged minority" effect in operation.

The premise that spawned the thread — that a particular style of play can be harmful — isn’t particularly great. That’s not justifying or pardoning crappy OSR proponents. Edition warring crap is toxic nonsense regardless of who does it. It does seem particularly crappy when it’s the dominant style punching down. You want to have a conversation about a particular system, and people are quick to chime in how 5e does things right in this way or that, or that those systems are broken some way. It doesn’t even have to be an OSR game. That’s basically the PF2 forum here in a nutshell over so many ridiculous threads.

(There was also the issue of the association with OS with certain particularly socially retrograde parts of the hobby, which gets really complex to unpack, since its not fair to tar the whole part of the hobby with that, but on the other hand you don't have to wander far into the OS hinterlands to hit that bigtime).

I was disappointed that the fifth article seemed to gloss over that. I agree it’s not fair to paint the whole OSR that way, but I think it’s something one needs to acknowledge (even if obliquely).

 

[Jack Daniel]

In any case, I suspect the attempt to keep "ownership" of the term "Old School" to apply only to D&D is a ship that has sailed. Not that its stopping people.

It's not a matter of owning the generic term "old school" (or having "old school" itself be any kind of value judgement); it's a matter of linguistic precision. The OSR was founded by old-school D&D players mostly interested in old-school D&D, with any interest in other old games being sporadic and largely incidental. Quite naturally, those original OSRites are not too terribly keen on the OSR "brand" being diluted.

It's not that there are a gaggle of grodnards out there who all hate Tunnels & Trolls, Traveller, and RuneQuest; or at least, I'm certainly not aware of any. Rather, it's D&D enthusiasts who are peeved that they now have to specify "old-school D&D" where previously—for at least a decade of online discussion and creativity—the specificity could just be assumed.

Like the article said: barreling into an OSR discussion space and assuming everybody wants to talk about Champions is a bit like pestering a vintage Ford forum about vintage Chevys, because, hey, we're all fans of old cars here, right?

 

[Hussar]

I think that's uncharitable, though there are no doubt instances where it's accurate. I don't think "old school" is a value judgement. I like and enjoy every edition of D&D, each for its own virtues.

Do you really think the historical overview in the linked series of articles is purely about personal taste? I do think the OSR was started largely due to varying personal tastes, but there are observable changes over time in what was emphasized in adventures and other books TSR put out at different time periods. The differences between (e.g.) the 1E and 2E DMGs are pretty stark.

Oh, absolutely it was uncharitable. I make no apologies for that. OSR is nearly always a very large blunt instrument to use in beating people over the head and attempts to claim ownership and gatekeeping in the community.

There's a significant difference between "I like older versions of D&D" which is perfectly fine, and the general tone of many (certainly not all, but a significant number) of OSR voices that veritably drip with either "git off my lawn" or "go woke, go broke" type attitudes. I mean, good grief, you've got NuTSR right there, banking on OSR feelings.

Or, put it another way. Whenever some social issue in the game comes up - be it gender issues, race, whatever, there is a very large overlap in the venn diagram of people that oppose the idea and play OSR games.

 

[bennet]

Oh, absolutely it was uncharitable. I make no apologies for that. OSR is nearly always a very large blunt instrument to use in beating people over the head and attempts to claim ownership and gatekeeping in the community.

There's a significant difference between "I like older versions of D&D" which is perfectly fine, and the general tone of many (certainly not all, but a significant number) of OSR voices that veritably drip with either "git off my lawn" or "go woke, go broke" type attitudes. I mean, good grief, you've got NuTSR right there, banking on OSR feelings.

Or, put it another way. Whenever some social issue in the game comes up - be it gender issues, race, whatever, there is a very large overlap in the venn diagram of people that oppose the idea and play OSR games.

There is probably an overlap between people who take Viagra and play OSR too, not sure what your point is. People want to play OSR because of childhood nostalgia, simpler rules, not because they care about a few people on twitters pronouns.