Gabe of Penny Arcade Slams the OSR

[The Shaman]

So, upon criticizing OSR zealots in this thread, it is John's duty to hunt down 4e and Pathfinder zealots to make things "fair"?

Please quote the line in my post where I said it was JRT's duty "hunt down zealots" of any stripe or pursuasion.

What I actually wrote is I'd be looking to see is he's as consistent as he claims to be, but if it will help you to sleep better at night, the truth is I really won't be.

 

[nedjer]

l is "rules light" or

kind of meant rules light literally. There are complex or rules dense variants but there's a pretty undeniable difference between the early basic sets and AD&D 1e in the first years of their lives and the 1000s, even 10,000s, of pages in the largest D&D derivatives, i.e. Pathfinder, 3.5, 4e.

'rules light' might be better replaced with steeper learning curve?

 

[nedjer]

Apples . . . Mmm.

Yeah, even rotten ones can make a good cider. So, no need to get rid of the delicious apple taste if you're prepared to try out a new recipe.

 

[JohnRTroy]

Please quote the line in my post where I said it was JRT's duty "hunt down zealots" of any stripe or pursuasion.

What I actually wrote is I'd be looking to see is he's as consistent as he claims to be, but if it will help you to sleep better at night, the truth is I really won't be.

I contribute to subjects that interest me. I am more interested in reading about OSR than I am about Pathfinder or 4e, so obviously I will probably encounter one type of "zealot" more than another.

But I have taken that stance before--I criticized the lynch mob that formed when the Army Builder suit was discussed, and in years past I've been a bit critical of "OGL fanatics", where the license and how it was used became more important than the game itself. If you find it hypocritical that I am not making any posts right now criticizing the same on the other camp, so be it. I really haven't said all that much on the subject, honestly.

If I am making comments, it's because of recent events and discussions more than anything else.

 

[Odhanan]

I also disagree with what some old school advocates consider to be properties of old school games, such as the assertions that old school is "rules light" or that old school begins and ends with OD&D.

It indeed doesn't. That's why it's particularly hard to just cast the same "OSR" light on people liking different vintage games for different reasons, talking about them in different ways, on different venues, and producing widely different products for them.

A person who is mostly into First Edition AD&D will discuss about vintage gaming in usually vastly different ways than a guy who'd play OD&D (1974) without Supplements first and foremost. They will have very different outlooks on a variety of gaming issues. Which of course doesn't mean that there aren't commonalities between these two gamers (or that one couldn't actually play both games equally, of course), but even they might not agree on what these commonalities exactly are.

Now add to this that most people interested in vintage games will not automatically agree on which games can be understood as being "old school" and which can't (Is Classic Traveller old school? What about RuneQuest? What about their Mongoose recent treatments? What about Castles & Crusades? What about... et cetera), and you've got at best a vague "OSR" nebula out there, with various people posting about their favorite OS games, what they enjoy about them, publishing their own materials for this games, etc, and nothing of a unified "movement" agreeing on a universal revision of what the "OSR dogma" should or should not be.

 

[Odhanan]

In gaming and other nerdy pastimes, however, I do get the impression that "nerd-rage" is a disease the older fans are more susceptible too . . . if I may generalize . . . (and, being almost 38, I consider myself a part of this older gamer demographic)

Please don't (generalize, I mean). That's how stereotypes come into being and stereotypes are generally nocive, detrimental to these kinds of gaming discussions (or any discussion, really, for that matter) comparing play styles and preferences.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I don't think he's slamming OD&D. I do, however, think he's doing a disservice to his players by treating it as a museum piece instead of a game that people are still playing.

How so? It's the prehistory of his world, so they're playing a (modded) older version of the game? It's meta-textural fun.

If you want him to include a PSA at the beginning and end of each session that there are hyper-sensitive people still playing OD&D, you're probably going to be disappointed.

 

[Dire Bare]

Please don't (generalize, I mean). That's how stereotypes come into being and stereotypes are generally nocive, detrimental to these kinds of gaming discussions (or any discussion, really, for that matter) comparing play styles and preferences.

I will. Nothing wrong with generalizing, or even stereotyping for that matter, as long as you're clear what you are doing (and you do it as fairly as possible). When you generalize, and you're aware of what you're doing, you're stating that there is a noticeable trend observed, but you realize it does not apply to all that fit within the category. Poor use of generalizing and stereotyping is assuming your observed trend DOES apply to all within the category.

It's an honest observation, that I feel that older gamers are more prone to the nerd-rage. How true my observation is, I don't know. I could be wrong, and others experiences may differ and contradict my own. I haven't done any scientific studies on the matter. But that's what my own observations have lead me to believe. I'd be happy to hear others differing opinions.

 

[Vigilance]

I definitely didn't see the PA article as a slam of old-school gaming, veiled or otherwise.

 

[Odhanan]

I will. Nothing wrong with generalizing, or even stereotyping for that matter

We'll have to agree to disagree, I'm afraid.