OSR Interested in dipping my toe into OSR but don’t know where to start. Any recommendations?

[Charlaquin]

Swords and Wizardry also has a unified mechanic for saving throws, which I think gives it a bit of a boost over OSE, as well as separate races and classes as default. Tons of support material as well. The organization and presentation is not as sharp as OSE, though.

That definitely gives it an edge in my mind. @jdrakeh also said it meets my qualifications well, so I’ll make looking into this one a priority along with the Black Hack.

 

[Retreater]

That definitely gives it an edge in my mind. @jdrakeh also said it meets my qualifications well, so I’ll make looking into this one a priority along with the Black Hack.

The S&W Complete Rulebook is a free PDF download on the Frog God Games site. Swords & Wizardry: Complete Rulebook – Frog God Games

 

[Yora]

Thanks so much, y’all! Sounds like The Black Hack (2e) and OSE(A) come pretty highly recommended. How “fiddly” is OSE? I gave the SRD a look, and I find the presentation quite approachable, but I don’t love how bonuses from ability scores vary from score to score, or certain tasks like opening stuck doors being resolved by an X-in-six roll while others are percentile based and others are a d20 roll, etc. But maybe it feels smoother in actual play than it looks on paper?

The only thing that varies is the Charisma modifier to reaction rolls. It's not neat and looks inellegant, but it's a necessity because of how raction rolls work. A reaction roll is a 2d6 roll with possible numbers from 2 to 12. Getting a +1 bonus means the 2 result can't happen at all and the 12 result becomes a lot more likely. With a +2 bonus it becomes even more extreme, but that only happens if you have a character with 18 CHA. If you make the +2 bonus apply to characters with CHA 16 to 18, and also allow for a potential +3 bonus, it would get really wonky.
I used to think making that modifier steamlined with all other modifiers would be a good idea because it looks more neat, but I believe that this is a case where having one exception to the rule really results in a much better experience.

 

[Voadam]

Thanks so much, y’all! Sounds like The Black Hack (2e) and OSE(A) come pretty highly recommended. How “fiddly” is OSE? I gave the SRD a look, and I find the presentation quite approachable, but I don’t love how bonuses from ability scores vary from score to score, or certain tasks like opening stuck doors being resolved by an X-in-six roll while others are percentile based and others are a d20 roll, etc. But maybe it feels smoother in actual play than it looks on paper?

B/X-OSE stat modifiers go from -3 to +3 and do not generally apply to skill check type mechanics. 13-15 = +1, 16-17 = +2, 18 = +3. Everybody has ability scores from 3-18 with no ASIs. This means roll 3d6 in order is much more feasible and the stats make less of an impact on character effectiveness. Str is for melee attack and damage, int is for languages, dex is for AC and ranged, con is for hp, and charisma is for reaction adjustment. It is easy to keep track of in practice, only attacks and melee damage modifiers get actively applied in most situations. HP, AC, and languages are applied once then used as the baseline so do not need to be considered again.

For the different types of ability checks there are basically three systems.

Most things are x out of 6. Searching for secret doors. Searching for traps. Listening. Opening stuck doors, etc. Quick and easy.

Thief skills are narrowly defined class specific powers and use percentiles that start off with only tiny chances of success. I have always hated them and prefer Necrotic Gnome's (the company behind OSE) B/X Rogue for an alt thief class.

In B/X-BECMI-RC roll under an attribute on a d20 was a later skill development system, mostly from the Gazetteer series, that also worked for ad hoc checks. Simple and easy, but places a huge emphasis on individual character ability scores.

Generally it is a DM call on what mechanics to use for non-combat stuff, including no rolls and adjudicating off of player descriptions of what they are doing (player skill) or just adjudicating what happens.

In play it is generally quick and smooth. Either a player calls out a defined thief skill and tells the DM their percentage of success, or the DM calls out a d6 roll or an ability score check.

 

[FriendlyFiend]

I've not played it, but Bundle of Holding currently has a $12.95 bundle of 'The Hero's Journey' RPG, which was based on Swords & Wizardry - that sounds like it might fit the bill.

 

[Yora]

Another pro-tip: Whichever game you pick to learn first, start with treating everything as rules as written (to the extend that it is actually written). Start thinking about tweaking it after you understand the whole system.
When I first got into B/X, I found that a lot of mechanics that seem weird and have a much better alternative do so because they actually are meant to accomplish something different than I expected. It's not just different mechanics to get to the same destination as d20 games. The games are trying to accomplish something different, and this often doesn't become obvious by just looking at individual mechanics. While there are not a huge number of moving parts, they all work together as a single unified system, often in unexpected ways. When you mentally switch out one rule with something that you think would be obviously better, then other rules that come up later might no longer work quite as intended.
Tweaking and customizing the rules should come after understanding the whole system as it actually works as described.

 

[thirdkingdom]

OSE is a good starting point because it (or rather, B/X) is the base of so many OSR-systems out there. Worlds without Number, for instance (mentioned above) uses B/X as a basis.

 

[Charlaquin]

The only thing that varies is the Charisma modifier to reaction rolls. It's not neat and looks inellegant, but it's a necessity because of how raction rolls work. A reaction roll is a 2d6 roll with possible numbers from 2 to 12. Getting a +1 bonus means the 2 result can't happen at all and the 12 result becomes a lot more likely. With a +2 bonus it becomes even more extreme, but that only happens if you have a character with 18 CHA. If you make the +2 bonus apply to characters with CHA 16 to 18, and also allow for a potential +3 bonus, it would get really wonky.
I used to think making that modifier steamlined with all other modifiers would be a good idea because it looks more neat, but I believe that this is a case where having one exception to the rule really results in a much better experience.

I can certainly see that, but to me that looks like an argument against having a different mechanic for reaction rolls rather than using the core resolution mechanic. Again, maybe it works out more smoothly in play, but to me the preponderance of bespoke mechanics for specific situations is one of the things that most turns me off of old-school systems.

 

[Charlaquin]

Another pro-tip: Whichever game you pick to learn first, start with treating everything as rules as written (to the extend that it is actually written). Start thinking about tweaking it after you understand the whole system.
When I first got into B/X, I found that a lot of mechanics that seem weird and have a much better alternative do so because they actually are meant to accomplish something different than I expected. It's not just different mechanics to get to the same destination as d20 games. The games are trying to accomplish something different, and this often doesn't become obvious by just looking at individual mechanics. While there are not a huge number of moving parts, they all work together as a single unified system, often in unexpected ways. When you mentally switch out one rule with something that you think would be obviously better, then other rules that come up later might no longer work quite as intended.
Tweaking and customizing the rules should come after understanding the whole system as it actually works as described.

This is generally my policy when trying any new system, and getting a better feel for this different style of play is exactly what’s got me interested in OSR, so I’ll definitely keep this in mind.

I’m thinking I’ll probably go for OSE, with some of the optional stuff from Advanced Fantasy (particularly separating race from class). Seems like if my goal is to experience old-school play, the best place to start would be the old-school rules, as they originally worked. Once I have a feel for that, I’ll have a better idea of what I like and dislike in that style of play and can seek out or design something more tailored to my preferences.

 

[JAMUMU]

My advice would be to use OSE as a starting point, as so many OSR games use B/X as a chassis. For a more AD&D feel, there's OSRIC, though I don't follow that anymore and I'm not sure how much material is still being developed for it. I used to be a big fan of Swords & Wizardry because you could get the game as text files, which made writing hacks a cinch, but these days for any OSR type shenanigans I noodle around with use OSE.

Two outliers I don't think I've seen mentioned are 1) Lamentations of the Flame Princess, which elicits strong reactions from people (and doesn't fit your no race as class criteria), but is an elegant re-tooling of the B/X rules to a specific OSR purpose and 2) Dungeon Crawl Classics, which is all about embodying a specific, semi-mythical style of old school play. These might be worth looking over if you get the chance, but OSE would definitely be my digging-in point if I was getting into the OSR today.